
Glass_J 


Fi% 


Rnnk 


,• - v!, 








BRIEF SKETCH, 



OF 



MARYLAND, 

ITS etEOGRAPHY, BOUNDARIES, HISTORY 
GOVERNMENT, LEGISLATION, INTER- 
NAL IMPROVEMENTS, &C, [j 



PRINTED 

FOR THE PUBLISHER. 



CONTENTS* 



GEOGRAPHY. 



Ch ApTE R 1— Name — Situation — Boundary— 
Extent — Population, pp. 1 

Chapter II — Natural Divisions — Bays— Riv- 
ers Mountains — Islands 

Swamps — Face oi the Country 
Mineralogy &c. PP-S 

BOUNDARIES. 

Chapter I— Of the grant of the Charter and 
Controversies as to the Limits 
of the State. pp.^5 



THE proprietary GOVERNMENT* 

Chapter I— Of the Nature of the Proprietary 

Government and Right of the 

Proprietary of Maryland, pp. 4S 

Chapter Il--Of the Personal Rights and 

Revenue of the Proprietary 

pp. 60 

Chapter lll—Of the Pigprietaries o f Mary- 

. land, p p. 69 



IV 

Oeneral Uiatoryc 

Chapter 1— A sketch of the History of the 
State. pp. 76 

First Era — From the Coloniaation 
to the Expulsion of James IJ. 
pp77 
Second Era— From this expulsion 
to the restoration of the Pro- 
prietary Government in 1715. 

Third Era— From 1715 to the trea- 
ty of Paris in 1763. pp. 87 

Revolutionary Era — Containing 
the proceedings during the A- 
inerican Revolution. pp. 89 

And also the same continued, 
together with the 

formation OF THE STATE GOVERN- 
MENT. pp 95 

LEGISLATION. 

Chapter I— The Common and Statute 
Laws, pp. 104 
Chapter II— Legislation in Maryland 
pp. Ill 

united states government. 
Chapter 1— Formation of the United Statei 
Government, and connexion ot 
iVlary land therewith, pp.119 



state covernment. 
Chapter 1— The Laws — Declaiation of 
Rights — Constitution— Origin 



of the Law-mnkfng power-Na- 
ture of the Charter— Origin of 
the Declaration ot Rights, and 
its connexion with and relation 
to the Constitution. pp. 127 

[Note Books. "l pp, 148 

Chaptek II— Right of Suffrage— Eligibility 

to office — Declaration of Reli- 

giou9 Belief— Oaths of Office, 

pp. 154 



IVIZSCELLANEOtrs 

Chapter I— The Revolution of 1S36.— Its 
causes.and history. — The eight 
million £111. pp. 188 

II— The Reform Bill ofl836-7-— 
The nature and substance of 
this bill. pp. 199 

The first Election under the 
Reform Bill and the arrange- 
ment of the Districts, Guber- 
natorial & Senatorial, pp 267 

III— History of the Internal Im- 
provement System- — Length 
& cost of construction, pp 210 

IV— The Maryland Judiciary, 
pp. 228 

V— Education and its support.— 



VI 

The Academical Fund— Thf 

[Free School Fund— Colleges 

Schoola&c. ; pp. 234 

VI— Statistics— Census of the State 
pp. 241 
VII— Colored Population — Their 
numbers and increase— Ulti- 
mate object and the progress of 
Colonization. pp, 244 

VllI— Trades and emplojmentg — 
number engaged in the differ- 
ent, pp. 254 

IX— Assessments— Valuation of the 

whole property of the State. 

pp, 255 



IHARYLAND. 



CHAPTER I. 

NAMEj SITUATION, BOUNDARY, EXTENT, 
POPULATION. 

wVame. — Crescentia, was the name 
Lord Baltimore intended to have 
given to the Territory granted to him 
by King Charles I. but upon presenting 
the patent for the royal signature, by 
way of compliment, the king was as- 
ked to name the new province; where- 
upon, he had the blanks left for the pur- 
pose, filled with Terra Maria, or Ma- 
ryland, in honor of his wife Henrietta 
Maria, daughter of Henry the Greats 
King of France and Navarre. Previ- 
ous to this grant it was considered as 
^art of Virginia. , 



Situation.— The State of Maryland 
is situated between 38 degrees, and 39 ^ 
decrees 44 minutes North latitude, 
and 75 deg. 10 ram. and 79 deg. 20 
min. West longitude from Greenwich. 
Boundary — It is bounded on the 
north by Pennsylvania and Delart^are— 
on the west, soulh-west and south by 
Virginia — on the east by the Atlantic 
ocean and the state of Delaware. 

ExTENT.-^It is 196 miles in length 
from east to west upon its north boun- 
dary line; but from the north west to 
the south eastern extremities of the 
state, is 240 miles, Iits greatest width 
is near the eastern boundary of the 
state, where it is 120 miles and dimin- 
ishes to its narrowest near Hancock, 
where the state is but three miles wide; 
it then again increases so as to be 40 
miles on. its western boundary. The 
superficies of the state is 13,950 square 
miles, of: which nearly one fifth is es- 
timated to be water. 

Let us here take a general and com- 
pendious glance at the population of 

the State:— 

Population— The first emigration 
to Maryland from Europe was in 1634, 



3 

In 1665 j the population had reached' 
aearly 16,000. 

In 1734, there were about 36,000 
•'taxables." In 1755, there were 55,- 
319 free white males, 49,908 free whits 
females, 1,574 male convicts, 407 te- 
male convicts, 3,592 mulattoes, 42,764 
negro slaves — ^I'otal 153,564. 

In 1790, there were 208,649 whites, 
103,036 slaves, 8,043 , free blacks— To- 
tal 319,728. 

In 1800, there were 221,998 whites, 
107,707 slaves, 19,987 free blacUs— 
Total 349,692. 

In 1810, there were 235,117 whites, 
111,502 slaves, 33,927 free blacks-r-To- 
tal 380,546. 

In 1820, there were 131,743 males, 
128,479 females, 260,222 vhites, 107- 
398 slaves, 39,730 free blacks— Total 
407,350 

Of the latter number, there were 79,- 
135 represented to be engaged in agri- 
culture; 18,640 in manufactures and 4,- 
771 in commercial pursuits. 

In 1830 there were 291,108 whites, 
102.994 slaves, 52.938 free blacks- 
Total 447,040. 

In 1840 there were 316,544 whites?, 
89 736 slaves, 61,837 free blacks^- 



Total 468,117. 

The increase of population from 1791? 
to 1820, was, during the ten years, 
from 1790 to 1800, 13,349J whites, 
16,615 ? blacks, free blacks 11,944, 
slaves 4.671— Total 29,964. 

During the second ten years 13,119 
whites, free blacks 3,795, slaves 13,940; 
together 17,735 blacks— Total 30,654. 

During the third ten years 25,105 
whites, free blacks^ 5,803. Deduct 
number of slaves diminished the first 
ten years 4,204; 1,599— Total 26,704. 

The increase of the whites during 
this fifty years was 112,595; of free 
colored 51,794, while slaves diminish- 
ed 12,900. 



: CHAPTER IL 

Natural divisions — bays — rivers — 
mountains— islands — swamps — 
face of the country — mineral- 
OGY. 

JVaiural Divisions. — The great Ches- 
apeake Bay making up througli the 
middle of the state from north to south, 
elongated by the Susquehanna river, 
divides it into two parts, familiarly 
terraed the Eastern Shore and the 
Western Shore, The Eastern Shore 
contains about one third of the superfi- 
cies of the state. The relative popu- 
lation of the (wo shores, were, 

W, Shore. E. Shore, 
In 1790 212,089 107.638 

1800 237,156 112,536 } 

1810 263,435 117,121 

1820 291,711 115,639 

1830 327,548 119,492 

1840 350,745 117,382 

Within the above period, the princi- 
pal increase of the population of the 
; state has been concentrated in the city 
i of Baltimore, which swelled in the 
fifty years, frona a population of 13.- 



'^503 to 102,313 souls. By abstracting 
this number from the population of the 
counties it will be found that the Eas-* 
tern Shore counties were for some time 
not very far short of the same ratio ol in- 
crease with the counties of the Wes- 
tern Shore. The increase of the form- 
er amounting to B,289, and the latter 
only to 30,386 between the years 1790 
and 1820;' but from 1820 to 1840 the 
Eastern Shore increased only 1,743, and 
tlie western, without Baltimore, 19,459. 
From 1820 to 1840 Baltimore in- 
creased 39,575 swelling its population 
to 102,313 by the census oi 1840. 

Bays and Rivers.- — The natural ad- 
vantages of Maryland, for commercial 
purposes, are of the first order. Her 
own sea coast indeed is of inconsidera- 
ble extent, and possesses no inlet invi- 
ting the entrance ot shipping for trade. 
The Smepuxen bay,stretching between 
the capes of Delaware and those of 
Virginia, is merely a channel between 
the eastern coast and a succession of 
Sands and islands. The sea coast of Vir- 
ginia andMaryland,takentogether,being 
open the whole year, having regular 
soundings, all its length, with good 
anchorage outside of the capes,ha8 justly 



been pronounced one of "the sufesf, 
evenest and boldest coasts in the uni- 
verse." 

The Chesapeake Bay, which makes 
in of 61 leagues South the Maryland, 
line, affords an entrance between Cape 
Charles and Cape Henry, familiarly 
called the capes of Virginia, nearly five 
leagues across, which width is increased 
within as the bay takes a northernly di- 
rection, extending two hundred miles 
up the country — seventy-five of which 
is in the state of Virginia, and the re- 
mainder divides the state of Maryand 
near its centre. This bay affords a good 
anchorage every where, and many ex- 
cellent harbors where shipping may 
ride in safety, protected from every 
wind that blows. Innumerable stream's 
of fine navigable waters branch cut on 
either side, penetrating the country in 
every direction, besides several noble 
rivers taking their rise at the base of 
the Alleghany ridge, or near the north- 
ern lakes, and flowing from those ele- 
vated countries, through many a fertile 
valley, to this great reservoir which 
might almost be termed an inland Sea, 
which varies from 7 to 18 miles in 
breadth, and covers about 2600 square 



8 

miles, or 1,700,000 acres. It is gener- 
ally as much as nine fathoms deep. — 
For fifty miles up the Potomac, that 
river is but an arm of the Chesapeake. 
The mouths of all the rivers making 
from the bay into either shore, are of 
the same character. The Patapsco, 
Maggothy, Severn, South River, West 
River, St. Mary's and York Rivers, 
on the Western Shore. The Poka- 
moke, Wycomoco, Chester, Sasafrass, 
Elk, and North-East Rivers, on the 
Eastern Shore, have comparatively tri- 
fling streams making in at their heads. 
Their tide and depth is from the Ches- 
apeake, of which al] ot them are but 
inlets. 

The Smquelianna River furnishes 
a greater tribute of fresh water to the 
ocean than any Atlantic river within 
the United States. The distance from 
its source to its mouth, is about 400 
miles. Its most remote sources are in 
the lakes Otsego and Otego, in the 
western part of New York, iitteen 
counties of which state are intersected 
by its branches. Thit enterprising 
state has already made surveys with a 
view of connecting these waters by ca- 
nals with their great commercial empo- 



9 

rium. To the north, the sources of the 
Susquehanna approach very near the 
waters of Lake Ontario, with which, 
and through it, with all the great nor« 
thern Lakes, they might be easily con- 
nected. Westward, its sources are iu 
the Allegany mountains, and approach, 
very near the Allegany river, to whicli 
Pennsylvania, with steady and certain 
march of improvement, has constructed 
communications reaching to the great 
western valley of the Slississippi on 
one hand, and to her capitol, by the 
Union Canal and Schuylkill river, 
on the other. The Susquehanna may 
be pronounced the great artery of 
the populous and fertile state of Penn- 
sylvania, from two thirds of the sur- 
face, and twenty eight of the counties 
of which, its waters descend and con- 
centrating before they reach Maryland 
flow into the head of the Chesapeake 
bay, 16 miles within the boundaries of 
the state, with so ample a volumn of 
water, that some topographers have 
contended that the Bay itself was but 
a continuation of the river Susquehan- 
na. Much of the products of the exten» 
sive country watered by this river ar^ 
brought on its floods or by canal t 



the' emporium of Maryland; but the 
difficulties presented by its rapids ob- 
struct a return of trade. Artificial 
courses have been made to some extent 
but the state of Maryland, it is feared, is 
looking on with too much indifference^ 
whilst her more industrious neighbors are 
cutting off, by turnpikes, canals,and rail- 
roads, the vast advantages which nature 
iiad so kindly directed into her bosom. 

Tide water ascends the Susquehanna 
only a few miles above the mouth of the 
river, and terminates at Port Deposit, 
ten miles below the Maryland line.-— 
Here a succession of rapids commence 
which continue to interrupt the ascend- 
ing navigation for nearly fifty miles to 
Columbia. The descent in that dis- 
tance is estimated at one hundred and 
forty feet, and the navigation is practi* 
cable only during high freshets. Twen- 
ty miles above Columbia are the Cona- 
wago Falls, around which, a canal has 
been dug, one mile in length. From 
these Falls the ascending navigation 
improves and meets no serious obstacle 
for batteaux, up to the Otsego and Ote- 
^0 Lakes in New York. 

The value of the descending trade of 
the Susquehanna in 1822, was estima- 



11 

xd at one million, one hundred and 
sixty-eight thousand, nine hundred and 
Sfty four dollars. 

During the months of March and A- 
pril, 1826, there passed Mar'etta, a vil- 
lage four miles above Columbia, 65 keel 
boats, 895 rafts, and 813 arks, which 
at a moderate estimate was valued at 
1,100,000 dollars. 

The Tide Water Canal which got 
into operation in 1840 now gives the 
State of Maryland a share of the trade 
of this region. 

The Pctomac River, rising at the eas- 
tern base, and rushing between ridges 
of the Alleghany mountains, thence as 
it were, breaking through the blue 
rid^e and South mountains, flows in a 
rapid stream into the Chesapeake, 105 
miles below the head of that bay. This 
river, from its source to the mouth, is 
the south west boundary of Maryland, 
dividing it from the state of Virginia^ 
interrupted however, for the space of 
a few miles by the District of Co- 
lumbia, in which, upon the Maryland 
side, is situated the city of Washing- 
ton, the seat of the NatiolQl Govern- 
ment. This part of the territory, as 
well as Georgetown, situate within the 



12 

limitsjof the District, was ceded by the 
State of Maryland to the nation, in the 
year 1790 for the purpose of erecting a 
Federal City. It is the characteris- 
tic of the Potomac that its head waters 
approach much nearer, and furnish a 
shorter and better course,for connecting 
with the waters of the great western 
valley, and communicating to the Mis* 
sissippi, than any other of the Atlantic 
streams. Surveys have been made under 
the direction of the states of Maryland 
and Virginia, and also by a corps 
of Engineers under directions from the 
United States authorities, to ascertain 
the practicabilit) of uniting the western 
with the eastern waters, through this 
channel. The practicability of the 
task has been clearly determined, as 
well as the facility with which connec- 
tions can be continued from the Poto- 
mac to the Patapsco on one hand, and 
from the Ohio to the Lakes on the oth- 
er, thereby eftecting much the shortest 
water communication between the sea 
ports of the Atlantic, and the vast ter- 
ritories of the west. No one who con- 
siders the advantages, political as well 
as comraWcial, which would result 
from such a connection, can doubt for 



13 

a moment its ultimate^accomplishinenL 
The course of the Potoniac, from its 
source to Cumberland, a distance of 
140 miles, is North-East. It here 
reaches within four or five miles of the 
Pennsylvania line, to which width the 
territory of Maryland is reduced for 
soMe distance. Thence the Potomac 
taking a S. E. direction, and receiving 
m its course the south or larger branch, 
of that river, and the Shenandoah, from 
the Virginia side, and the Antietam 
and Monocacy Irom the Maryland side 
reaches tide water at Georgetown, 
three miles aEove Washington, and 
188 miles below Cumberland. In this 
distance there are five falls. 1st, Lit- 
tle Falls 37 feet, six miles above Wash- 
ington — 2d, nine miles higher up is 
the Great falls, of 76 feet — 3d, six miles 
further up, is the Seneca Falls, a rapid 
descending about 10 feet — 4th^ the 
Shenandoah Falls of 15 feet high, is 
sixty miles further up — five miles above 
the Shenandoah,is Hoar's Falls, Canals 
iiave been constructed round all these 
falls, to facilitate navigation. The dis- 
tance from Washington to the mouth of 
the Potomac is 300 miles, which is aa, 
^jgable for large vessels. The souDd« 



14 

ings are 7 fathoms at the mouth; 5 at 
St. George's Island, diminish to three 
fathoms at Alexandria, and to ten feet 
from thence to the little falls. This ri- 
ver is 1 1-4 miles wide at Alexandria, 
and 7 J-2 miles wide where it enters . 
the Chesapeake bay. 

The Patuxentj the Patapsco, the 
Monocacy; and many other ^fivers of 
considerable extent, rising in the ele- 
vated grounds of the Western Shore. 
and the numerous creeks leading into 
them, afford by their fall, an immense 
aggregate of water power, which is em- 
ployed in propelling machinery for the 
most useful manufactures, which more 
than compensates their neighborhood 
for the want of the conveyance of that 
navigation which is so singularly enjoy- 
ed by those resident on the Eastern 
Shore and the Western borders of the 
Chesapeake. 

The Patapsco, heads near the north- 
ern boundary of the state, and runs 
south and southeast to ElkRidge Land- 
ding, eight miles from Baltimore, where 
it falls down a moderate precipice, and 
turning eastwardly, spreads by degrees 
into a broad stream, like a bay. It is 
navigable as far as Elk Ridge landings 



15 

a few miles below which, it receives a, 
stream called Gwinn's Falls. At Whet' 
stone Point, on which stands Fort Mc° 
Henrj-, it connects with the basin of 
water upon which the city of Baltimore 
is situated, and which receives at its 
head, a fine mill-stream, called Jones* 
Falls. Fifteen miles below Baltimore, 
the Patapsco flows into the Chesa- 
peake. 

The Magothy, Severn, South, and 
West rivers, are navigable waters, pen- 
etrating a few miles from the west side 
of the. Chesapeake into Anne- Arundel 
county. 

The Paiuxtnt, takes its rise in two 
branches near the point where Freder- 
ick. Baltimore, Montgomery and Anne- 
Arundel Counties intei-sect each other; 
the branches unite a few miles above 
the village of Queen-Ann, thence it 
runs nearly parallel, with the Potomac 
and has a fine harbor for shipping with- 
in its mouth. The river is navigable 
for 50 miiesj its entire length is about 
100 miles. It is the dividing line be- 
tween Saint Mary's, Charles, and= 
Prince George's Counties, which lay 
on its south side, and Calvert and Ann^ 
Arundel, on iti north 



16 

On the Eastern Shore, the Pocomoke 
1 ises in the Cyprus Swamps, and runs 
south and south-west, forty miles tc 
J*ocomoke bay, which joins the Chesa- 
peake at the Virginia line. 

The Wycomoco runs south west, a- 
boat twenty miles. 

The JYanticoke rises in the ridge of 
the peninsula in Delaware, and runs 
south and south west, twenty five miles 
in that state and thirty miles in Mary- 
land. It is the largest river between 
the Delaware and Chesapeake bays. 

The Choptanh, rises in the borders of 
the same state, in the same ridge, and 
runs south by west, thirty miles, and 
west by north, fifteen miles. It is a 
broad navigable stream and has Cam* 
bridge situate upon its bank. 

Qhestcr nre7',risiug in the"stateof Del- 
aware, divides Kent from Queen Ann's 
county, in Maryland, and enters the 
Chesapeake at the head of Kent Island. 

Sassafras river, running in the same 
direction, divides Kent from Cecil coun- 
ty — above this is the Bohemia river. 

Elk river, rises in Chester county, 
Pennsylvania^ and runs east and south, 
twenty-two miles to Elkton, where it 
receives the Little Elk from the north- 



1/ 

west. Thence it runs south-west, thir° 
teen miles to the Chesapeake. Navi- 
gable for vessels drawing twelve feet 
water to Elkton. 

The Hudson river makes up from the 
bay into Dorchester county. 

Wye river, in like manner, penetrates 
Talbot county. 

Besides these, there are many consid- 
erable creeks, some of which take the 
name of rivers as they increase in size. 
Of these on the western shore are; 

The Monocacy, rising in Pennsylva- 
nia, and running through a rich valley 
in Frederick county, receiving in its 
course the little and tiie larger Pipe 
creeks, empties into the Potomac at the 
Montgomery line The Cotoctin, runs 
at the base of the mountain of that 
name. The Antietam, rising also ir. 
Pennsylvania, flowing through Wash- 
ing county, empties into the Potomac, 
at Williamsport. Deer creek, in like 
manner watering Harford county, flows 
into the Susquehanna above Port De- 
posit. The neck of land between the 
Susquehanna aad the Patapsco is inter- 
sected by several rivers, the Bush, the 
little Gunpowder, the big Gunpowder, 
Middle river, &c. most of which are 



18 

^.avigable for some miles above where 
they empty into the Chesapeake. 

Islands . — KevJ, the largest Island 
in the Chesapeake bay, is situated op- 
posite to Annapolis, and constitutes a 
part of Queen Anne's county. It is 
twelve miles in length; and about half 
that in bread tb,havino' a number of good 
farms and a population of some hun- 
dred souls. 

This Island was resorted to by the 
British, during the late war. Admiral 
Warner landed and encamped several 
liundred men upon it, ui the summer of 
the year 1813, where they remained for 
six w^eeks. 

Spesutl island, formed at the mouth 
of tlie Susquehannah; Black island, a 
lew miles below; Pool's island at the 
mouth of Gunpowder; Poplar island, 
below Kent, and Sharp's island, at the 
mouth of Choptank rivei; James* island 
and Hooper's island are all situated in 
the Chesapeake bay, in this state, as 
well as two or three of the range of Tan* 
gier islands^ which are formed opposite 
and below the mouth of Potomac river. 

Mountains. — In the western extre- 
mity, where the state is very narrow, 
it is very mountainous; being crrsseil 



19 

by the various ridges of the Alleghany. 
The Blue mountain, and the South 
mountain, the most eastern of the range 
cross the state some distance above 
Frederick. 

Swamps. — Maryland divides the Cy- 
prus Swamp with the state of Delaware, 
It is twelve miles long from north to 
south, and six miles wide, containing 
nearly an area of 50,000 acres. It is a 
high level basin situate upon the ridg<^, 
between the Chesapeike and | Atlantic, 
and contains a great variety of plants, 
trees, wild beasts and reptiles. 

jMineralogy. — Iron ore of excellent 
quality, is plenty in many parts of the 
state, furnishing materials for a number 
ot iron works. Copperas and Alum are 
manufactured on th« Magothy river, 
near the Chesapeake bay j coal abounds 
in the western district. Especially ii. 
Allegany County, which has been just- 
ly called the Wales of America, is there 
an immense abundance of Coal, esteem- 
ed the best in the world, and of Iron 
in great quantity. The State Geologist 
has presented some interesting Reports 
as to the Geological features of the 
country. 

Pace of the Couniry. — The jandv 



20 

upon the Eastern Shore of the Chesa^ 
peake, are low and level, and in some 
places covered with stagnant water^- — 
On the Western Shore, the largest pro- 
portion of the land between the bay 
and the first falls of the rivers, has been 
pronounced level and free from stones; 
but it is intersected in many directions 
by hills of considerable elevation. From 
the first falls to the Blue Ridge, the 
country becomes more uneven, then 
hilly, and finally mountainous. Pro- 
ceeding westward, it continues of the 
latter description; the South mountain, 
is the first of the range, then the 
Blue Ridge, and further on, the Allega- 
ny mountains, beyond which, we reach 
the western limits of the state. There 
are several fine rich vallies west of the 
Alleghany mountain, particularly along 
the courses of the Youhiogany. Upon 
the mountain regions, are situated con- 
siderable tracts of level country, deno- 
minated glades^ which afford excellent 
pasture for herds of cattle, which are 
merely marked by their owners and 
driven here to subsist until they are fit 
for market. Between the Allegany 
and the Blue Ridge, lies a rich fertile 
limestone vallev. 



21 

Turning to speak of the United 
States, Malta Brun, in his excellent 
modern geography says: 

**\Ve now approach a raore genial 
climate, where the foiest puts forth a 
vigorous vegetation and the fields are 
covered with abundant harvests. In 
this region, man is every where occu- 
pied in building houses, in founding 
cities, in opening new lands, and in 
subjugating nature. >Ve hear, on all 
sides, theblow.s of the hatchet, and the 
blasts of the forge: we see the ancient 
forests delivered to the flames, and the 
plough passing over their ashes. We 
observe smiling cities, temples, and 
palaces, rise up within a short distance 
of cabins inhabited by Indian savages. 
We now tread the soil of federal Am- 
erica, that land of liberty, peopled by 
numerous colonies whom oppression 
and intolerance forced to leave the Bii- 
tish isles, and the other parts of Eu- 
rope." 

Our countrymen would be apt to 
consider this picture of improvement as 
only applicable to the new states of the 
Union. Already Virginia, Maryland, 
Delaware and the eastern states are 
looked upon, and spoken of as ancient 



22 . 

domhiions in regard to the other states. 
But the portrait is true when reviewed 
fiom Europe. What vast resources* 
what fields for cultivation still remain 
untouched in Maryland! May we not 
hope that the spirit of improvement, 
now '^abroad in the land,'' will not on- 
ly tend to develope, tut also insure the 
improvement of these resources? 



21 n © S^ 2) IB ^ Q 
MARYLAND- 

CHAPTER I. 

Of the grant of the Charter anp 

controversies as to the limits of 

THE State. 

By the discovery and exploration of 
the continent of North America, by 
Sebastian Cabot, in the year 1498, the 
crown of Great Britain was considered 
as entitled to dispose of that part of the 
country which is now comprehended 
within the bounds of the State of Mary- 
land. Accordingly, in 163^2, a charter 
v;as granted by Charles I, to Cecilius, 
Baron of Baltimore, for a grant of land 
which seems to be much more exten- 
sive than that which now constitates 
the limits of the State. 

How the restriction of these original 
limits took place will be seen in ths 
course of our remarks. In the yea? 



24 

16'20, previous to the granting ol Mary- 
land to Lord Baltimore, a charter had 
been granted to the ''Council of Ply- 
mouth for the planting and governing 
of that country called A'etu England'^ 
and which invested that company with 
the riglit of soil and government over 
all the country, lying between the 40th 
and 48th degrees oi" north latitude. — 
The grant to Lord Baltimore extended 
on the North to the "40th degree of 
latitude, where New England is termin- 
ated;" so that the line of demarcation 
on the north was sufficiently distinct, 
one might suppose, to prevent all al- 
tercation. The settlements of this com- 
])any were at that time confined within 
the present limits of Massachusetts. 

In the year 1606, a j^rant had been 
made to a company, called the London 
Company ,\\'h\c\\ had the right of making 
settlements between the 38th and 45t'i 
degrees and which in 1609 obtained a 
new grant under the name of the 
''Treasurer and Co. of .-Adventurers of 
the oily of London for the first colony 
of Virginia," and to whom was granted 
the rigliis to the land north and south 
of Cape Comf'jrt two hundred miles in 
both directions; and ia 1611, a third 



25 

chaiter was granted to the same extent. 
The colony of Virginia remained under 
these charters till 1623, when in con- 
sequence of the refusal of the company 
to accept in place of the charter which 
they had, another charter, such as the 
king should grant, a quo tvarrunto was 
issued, and the charter annulled, the 
rights of the company re-vested in the 
crown, and Virginia rendered what was 
termed a ''Royal Government." 

Thus, before the charter was granted 
to Lord Baltimore, the king had again 
the right to grant to him the land, which 
was comprehended in the first Virginia 
grants, as he did. 

And in fact previous to the grant of 
this charter, no settlements had been 
made within the limits of Maryland, 
with the exception of a small colony on 
Kent Island under William Clayborne, 
who in the years 1626, '27, and '28, ob- 
tained licenses from the government of 
Virginia to trade in and to discover the 
sources of the Chesapeake. He also 
received a license from Charles 1 in 
1631 to trade in all those seas and coasts 
&/C., in those parts where there had 
been no previous grant from the crown. 
This was the only settlement in Marj* 



26 

land at the time of the grant to Lor^ 
Baltimore. 

Notwithstanding this however, and 
the perfect right whicli the king had to 
i[;rant the country within the limits of 
Maryland at that time^ to Lord Bal- 
timore, still there was great opposition 
on the part of Virginia to a grant which 
included a part of what had formerly 
belonged to her limits. In 1633 she 
complained of this to the Privy Codneil,, 
which adjudged however, that Lord 
Baltimore should be left in possession^ 
of his grant and the petitioners to their 
remedy at law, if they had any such* 
In 1634 Clayborne requested the advice 
of the Government of Viiginia as to 
the course he should pursue in his 
difficulties with Lord Baltimore, when 
they expressed their surprise at such a 
fjuestion, and remarked that they saw 
no reason for surrendering their right 
to the Island of Kent, or to any other 
territory formally granted to their colony 
by his majesty's patent. They were 
desirous of having the old charters con- 
sidered as being still in force, notwith- 
standing the judgment of forfeiture 
against them by quo warranto in 16'24. 
Accordingly the Assembly of Virgini& 



2T 

presented a petition to the House of 
Commons in which they prayed the 
restoration ot the ancient patents. — 
This prayer was, however, soon dis- 
avowed by the Governor and Council 
and the question put to rest by the 
Kinds' reply in 164:2. Thus did the 
claims of Virginia to the territory of 
Maryland cease until the assumption of 
the government of Maryland by the 
commissioners of Crom well, when some 
of them urged him to take it out of the 
hands of the Propiietary and attach it 
again to Virginia. This was not done 
however, and in 1658 the Proprietary's 
Governor, Fendall, again took posses-, 
sion of the State, since which time all 
claim of jurisdiction on the part of 
Virginia has entirely ceased. 

Claims of Claybonie. — Clayborne, 
as statsd above, claimed his right as 
subordinate to Virginia, and in 1634 
applied to the government of that State 
lor advice as to his couiseand recei vino- 
countenance in his pretensions from 
them, refused submission to Lord 
Baltimore. 

In the latter part of 1634, Lord Balti- 
more gave orders to seize him, and he 
ivas, after considerable resistance, oo 



28 

llged to fly to Virginia. Tlie vessei 
which he had fitted out against the 
colony was captured and he himself 
compelled to seek lefuge in Virginia. 
He was demanded of the goveinor of 
that State, who did not surrender him 
up, under pretence of respect for the 
King' license to him to trade, but sent 
him to England, to await the decision 
of the King. He then petitioned the 
king for a confirmation of his grant and 
a restoration of his possessions. But 
in 1638, the commissioners finally ad- 
judicated upon it, giving the title to 
J./Ord Baltmiore znd asserting that no 
settlements ought to be made or com- 
merce canied on witliout his license. 
Clayborne then became a petitioner to 
the Governor and Council of Maryland 
ior the restoiation of his confiscated 
property. The rejection of this peti- 
tion induced iiim to join with a certain 
Richard Ingle, who had been proclaim- 
ed a Traitor to the king, and, \vho to- 
gether with Clayborne, excited a for- 
midable rebellion in the province, even 
compelling the Governor to fly to Vir- 
ginia for protection in 16 i5, after whicli 
Clayborne assumed the powers of 
government together with Ingle: and 



29 

indeed remained in possession until 
1646, during which time many of the 
records of the government were de- 
stroyed. 

In 1651, the parliament having ob- 
tained the supremacy in England, a 
commission was issued to Clay borne, 
Fuller and others, to reduce and govern 
the colonies within the Chesapeake 
Bay. Virginia soon yielded, and in 
1652 Stone, the proprietary's governor 
submitted and was permitted to retain 
and administer the government in the 
name of the Keepers of the liberty of 
England. It remained in his hands 
until July 1654, when, during the time 
of Cromwell's usurpation, he endeavor- 
ed to maintain his power by force of 
arms, but was defeated, and taken 
prisoner, and Clayborne and his asso- 
ciates assumed the rule ot the Province, 
and appointed commissioners to ad- 
minister it. In 1658, the province was 
again restored to the proprietary by 
treaty and thus ended the claims of Clay- 
borne, as well as of Virginia, to any 
jurisdiction over the territor} of Mary- 
land. 

South Eastern Boundary.— Some con- 
troversy having arisen relating to the 



30 

location of Watkins' vpoint, the point 
which the charter of Maryland called 
for to the south east cf the State, in the 
year 16G8, a commissioner was appoint- 
ed for Maryland and another for 
Virginia', who settled the point as that 
made by th.^ "North side of Pocomoke 
Bay and the Sualh side of Annamessex 
Bay," and tiius tnded the diiiiculty 
which existed as to that point. 

JVorthern and Eastern Boundaries.-^- 
The charter of Maryland called for 
"the 40th degree of latitude on the 
north, where New England is termina- 
ted." This wns sufficiently distinct of 
itself, but a settlement had been made 
by the Swedes on the Delaware, which 
settlement was reduced by the Dutch 
West India Company in 1655, when 
the vSwedish colonists became the sub- 
jects of the States General and submit- 
ted to the government of New Nether- 
lands. The settlement being small 
seems to have attracted but little atten- 
tion, until 1G59; when the Governor 
and Council of Maryland appointed a 
commissioner 'Ho repair to the pretend- 
ed Governor of a people seated in 
Delaware Bay, and inform him that 
ihev were seated within his lord ' * 



Bi 

province without notice," and ah® 
to offer them protection, if they would 
submit to his authority. Laying claim 
to the country, they refused to do this, 
when an agent was appointed to pro* 
ceed to Holland to enforce upon the 
West India Company the claims of the 
proprietary to the territory in question 
and to require its abandonment. This 
requisition was not complied with, 
though orders were given by the com- 
pany to the settlers to withdraw from 
the territory about Cape Henlopen; 
but New Castle and the adjacent coun- 
try was still retained in their posses- 
sion. 

In 1664, Charles II, granted to his 
brother James Duke of York, all that 
tract of country extending from the 
west banks of Connecticut, to the eas- 
tern shore of Delaware, and conferred 
upon him the power to govern the 
same. An armament was despatched 
under Colonel Nicholls for the reduc- 
tion of this New Netherlands, and in 
the same year, the settlements upon 
the Delawar2 were surrendered to these 
forces, and were by them admitted to 
all the privileges of English subjects. — 
From this period until the grant of 



32 

Penn, these settlements, embracing a 
small extent of country along the Dela- 
ware, continued as the dependencies of 
the government of New York, although 
clearly within the limits of Maryland, 
as granted to Lord Baltimoreo 

In 1680 Penn petitioned Charles 11 
for a grant of lands westward of Dela- 
ware and north of Maryland. In 1681, 
after consultation with the Secretary of 
the Duke of York and with Lord 
Baltimore's agents, the grant was made 
to him in which the boundary called for 
on the south was "a circle of twelve 
miles drawn around New Castle to the 
beginningofthe 40th degree of latitude.' 
This of course left it doubtful whether 
the twelve miles were to be the 
diameter or the radius of the circle, and 
gave origin to some of the numerous 
controversies between Penn and Lord 
Baltimore. 

In 1681 an interview took place 
between Lord Baltimore and Penn, at 
Chester, in which Penn presented the 
king's letter to Baltimore requiring the 
two proprietaries to adjust the bound- 
aries between the provinces according 
to the calls ot the charters. 

At this interview it was discovered 



3a 

that Chester itself was at least twelve 
miles south of the 40th degree, and 
therefore within the boundaries of 
Maryland, which would extend to the 
Schuylkill. This ended the confer- 
ence, and in I6S2, Penn obtained from 
the Duke of York, another grant of the 
town of New Castle, with all the 
territory twelve miles around it, and 
aSso all the territory south of the arm 
tO' cape Henlopen, and also got from 
him a release of all claims which he 
had to Pennsylvania. 

Pena bein^ thus in the possession of 
the original grant from Charles II, the 
grant and release *from the Duke of 
York, and the letter from Charles II to 
the proprietary of Maryland, directing 
Itici to assent to a speedy adjustment 
of his northern boundaries, and to deter- 
laii^ie them by measuring from his 
southern boundaries two degrees to the 
north reckoning sixty miles to the de- 
gree, again sought another interview 
with Lord Baltimore. This accord ing- 
Ij took place in 1682 in Maryland when 
Lord Baltimore declined complying 
with the letter of Charles and stated to 
hfm that his charter ''called for na 
speci^c number of degrees, but for the 



34 

fortieth degree of latitude and that no 
royal mandate could deprive him of his 
right." In 1683 another interview 
took place which also ended without 
an amicable adjustment. Accounts 
of these negotiations were transmitted 
to the commissioners of trade and plan- 
tations from each party, and Penn now 
fuulinu; that his grant would not bear 
him out in rightly obtaining the pos- 
session of the territory of which he was 
desirous, commenced his objections to 
the charter to Baltimore, on the ground 
that the Delaware settlements had 
been purchased and planted by the 
Dutch before the charter was granted; 
and that evei? if ]jaltimore had acquir- 
ed a right to them under the charter, 
he had forfeited them by suffering 
others to retain possession of them for 
foity years. This was the objection 
which ultimately, in 1685, by the 
decision of the comniissioners of trade 
and plantations, deprived Baltimore of 
what now constitutes the State of Dela» 
ware. In 1684 Penn proceeded to 
^England, in person to have the matter 
settled, whilst in the meantime and 
throughout the controversy, efforts were 
made bv lialtimore to have settlements 



35 

made in the disputed territory. In 
1685, Penn succeeded in having a 
decision made by the commissioners of 
plantations, in which they derided that 
Lord Baltimore's grant only i ^eluded 
"iands uncultivated and inir/i>ited by 
savages and that the territo y along 
the Delaware had been geUled bv 
christians antecedently to tliis granr, 
and therefore was not included in it.'* 
Thus did the commissioners of planta- 
tions, by this decision, coniirm the 
grant of king James to Pehn. 

This decision, however, owing to 
the troubles both in England and in the 
provinces during the reign of Jame?, 
and the Protestant Revolution which 
succeeded was not carried into effect, 
but the liniih of the province thus con- 
tinued unsettled until 1718. In 1689 
the governme^it of the province of 
Maryland passed from the hands of 
the proprietors into those of the Protest* 
ant Association, where it continued 
until 1691, when it was again taken 
out of their hands and became and con- 
tinued a "royal government," that is, 
in the hands of ihe king, until 1716. 
during all of which time the proprie- 
tary, being a Catholic, was stripped q( 



36 

all his rights. In 1718 Penn died 
leaving his province to his sons Johr 
Thomas, and Richard Penn. 

From tlie decree of 1685 up to the 
agreement of 173*2, frequent contro 
versies were had between the Mary- 
landers and Pennsylvanians as to the 
boundaries which sometimes ended in 
battles. During all this time, the 
peace was kept only by temporary ex- 
pedients, till, in that year, an agree- 
ment was entered into between Lord 
Baltimore and the Penns, in which the 
former with too facile a disposition 
conceded to the latter nearly all that 
they claimed. Seeing the extent to 
which he had gone, he now sought 
from king George II a confirmation of 
his charter, which was opposed by the 
Penns on the ground of the voluntary 
agreement and surrender of the terri- 
tory by Baltimore to them. The result 
was, that in 1735, the Penns were 
directed by an order of the king in 
council, to institute proceedings in 
Chance! y to test the validity of this 
agreement which had been made be- 
tween them. About this time an attack 
being made upon the house of Thomas 
pres^ap and some fearful excesses com- 



37 

mitted, the Proprietaries were coai- 
mantled to put a stop to them, and in 
1738 a provisional line was run to effect 
this object. In 1750 Lord Hardwicke 
pronounced the decision of the court 
upon the agreement between Baltimore 
and the Penns, in which tiie agree- 
ment was ordered to be carried into 
specitic execution, and commissioners 
were appointed to fkx the' boundaries 
according to the agieemeiit. . 

In 1751, Charles Lord Baltimore, 
with whom the agreement of 1732 had 
been entered into, died, which opened 
anew the difficulties, as two convey- 
ances of the province of Maryland had 
been made in strict selthmeni^- 
by which Fred(Mick,the present propri 
etary, contended that he was protected 
from the operation of the agreement of 
173:2 and t'e decreee of 1750 
and therefore resisted them. An- 
other bill was therefore filed in 
Chancery by the Penns to compel him 
to submit, but before a decree was had, 
another agreement was made, in 1760, 
between Lord Baltimore and the Penns, 
which confirmed the agreement of 1732, 
and the decree of 1750, and thus final- 
ly settled this protracted controversy. 
According to this agreement, comniis- 



38 

sioners were appointed to settle the 
exact boundaries between them. They 
assembled in New Castle and commen- 
ced their labors in 1760, and ::lose(l 
them in 1768 by a final report to the 
proprietaries; during all of which period 
they kept a daily journal of the trans- 
actions, authenticated each day by 
the signiture of each commissioner 
present. The boundary line between 
Pennsylvania and Maryland was thus 
definitively located, the surveys being 
made by Messrs. Mason and Dixon, 
and hence this boundary is frequently 
referred to as Mason's and Dixon's 
line-" 

It was laid oft' with boundary stones, 
with the greatest care and disinterested- 
ness throughout its whole extent. The 
Journal of Surveyors is still presented. 

Southern and Western Boundary. — - 
The grant to Lord Baltimore on the 
south and west extended to the "first 
fountain of the river Potomac," and of 
course depended upon the exact location 
of that fountain, whether at the head of 
the north branch or of the south branch 
of that river. A grant for the territory 
south of this had been made by king 
James II to Thomas Lord Culpepper, 



39 

from whom it descended to Lord Fair- 
fax, vviio ill 1748 opened a Land OfHce, 
which he kept open until his death in 
i78L 

The line between the State of Vir- 
ginia and Fairfax's grant, Mas settled, 
and confirmed by the king in council 
and the legislature of Virginia in 1748, 
in which the northern branch of the 
Potomac was assumed by them as the 
first head of that river. But it does not 
seem that the Proprietary of Maryland 
was in any way connected with, or 
consulted as to that settlement, nor 
could he be precluded by any such 
ex parte proceeding. After the Revo- 
lution, the State of Virginia assumed 
the jurisdiction over the territory which 
bad been granted to Fairfax. 

It has always been contended by 
Maryland that the south branch oi the 
Potomac was the longest stream, and, 
in 1753, the Proprietary of Maryland 
in his instrutions to the governor directs 
him to prohibit ''settlements under 
Fairfax in the country north of the 
south branch;" and, though the difficul- 
ties and troubles which ensued in the 
colonies from the Indian Wars and the 
excitement of the Revolutiouj prevent- 



40 

ed an adjustment of tliese limits down 
to that time, yet, the Proprietary had 
never relaxed that claim, and the con- 
stitution of Virginia adopted in 1776, 
fully recognised the right uf Maryland 
"to all the territory contained within 
its charter &c." In 1777 commission- 
ers were appointed from both the States 
of Virginia and Maryland to settle the 
question as to the jurisdiction over the 
waters of tlie State &,c. and a compact 
was entered into between them for the 
punishment of oliences &c. which has, 
however, been superseded by the adop- 
tion of the U. S. Constitution and the 
jurisdiction of the Federal Government. 
But by this compact, no settlement was 
made as to tlie south western boundary, 
which still remained in the same con- 
dition until 1795., In this year com- 
missioners were appointed by the State 
of Marylajid to meet those who should 
be appoiiited on the part of Virginia, to 
adjust this boundary; — various delays 
ensued, and when commissioners were 
finally appointed upon the part of 
Virginia, ihey v»ere so restiicted in 
their powers as to render negotiation 
with them usclef^s, and thus the matter 
rested until 1810, when resolutions 
were again passed by the legislatuie of 



41 

Maryland under wiiich nothing was 
done; and agftin in 1818 resolutions 
were passed for the appointment oi 
commissioners, and proposing to Vir- 
ginia to adopt the most ivestein source 
of the northern hrdinch as the point from 
which the western boundary should 
commence as a matter of compromise. 
In conformity with the propositions of 
this act, Virginia appointed commis- 
siouers, but again restricted them to 
commence the western boundary ''at a 
stone planted by Lord Fairfax on the 
head waters ot the Potomac;" — this of 
course rendered useless the iippoint- 
ment ol commissioners on the part of 
Maryland as the very question at issue 
was precluded and closed. Commission- 
ers, however, were appointed, but 
those from Virginia, declining to throw 
open the matter in controversy and in- 
sisting upon designating the boundary 
to commence according to their instruc- 
tions, at the stone planted by Lord 
Fairfex, the negotiation of course end- 
ed. 

in much the same condition the con- 
troversy still remain^?, up to the present 
time, and although soon after the report 
of the commissioners, there was a con*- 
«iderable disposition manifested to bav^ 



42 

the case decided by the federal courts, 
yet no steps have, up to the present 
time, been taken to effect that object- 



CHAPTER 1. 

Of the nature of the Proprietary 
Government and Rights of the 
Proprietary of Maryland. 
There were three different kinds of 
colonial government adopted for the 
reajulation of the provinces, known as 
''Royal Governments^-' "^Charter Gov^ 
ernments," ''-Fropnelary Governments,''^ 
The Rojal Government was where the 
colony was immediately under the rule 
of the crown, such as Virginia and 
North Carolina, <^c. — the Charier Go- 
ve;nment was where the government of 
the colony was in the hands of the colo- 
nists themselves, who governed in con- 
formitv to a charter from the king:_such 



44 

■^vere Connecticut, Rliode Island, and 
Massachusetts;— the J^roprieiary gov- 
e^-nment was where the charter grant- 
ing the Territv)ry also granted the ju- 
risdiction to eithtr one or more persons 
as Proprietaries of the Territory granted 
and with the right to govern the peo- 
ple. These proprietaries were either 
single individuals or more frequently 
companies-, — the colonies oi the former 
Avere generally belter governed and less 
liable to difficulties and controversies 
than those of the latter. 

The Proprietary government of Ma- 
ayland was considered as one of the 
most favorable kind. It is supposed 
that the charter which granted the 
Territory to Lord Baltimore was drawn 
\ip by himself, and contained such ex- 
tensive and favorable powers, that Ma- 
ryland was almost the only proprietary 
government wiiich, though suspended 
twice, once from about 1650 (Crom- 
well's time,) to 1658, and once again 
Irom 1689, (the time of Ihe^expulsion of 
James 11) to 1715 when it passed into 
the hands ot the Protestant Associators, 
jet, when again restored, continued in 
fall operation to the time of the Revolu- 
tion; — while in the meantime the pro- 
prietary government of Virginia, which 



45 

had been granted to the London Conr- 
paoy, as well as those of Ne^ Jersey 
and of Carolina which had been grant- 
ed -subsequently to that of Maryland, 
were changed from proprietary govern- 
ments to Royal Governments. 

The charter of Maryland which was 
granted to Lord Baltimore and which 
contains 23 sections may be found in 
the introduction to Kilty's Laws of Ma- 
ryland and in this we must seek for 
the origin of the powers and of the 
rights of the Proprietary. 

L*^t us here briefly consider those 
powers, and see how near the Pro- 
prietary ot Maryland was to being a 
King of the State. 

Proprietary's Power as to making 
Law^. — The charter provided that ttie 
proprietary was to enact laws "by and 
with the advice, assent and approbation 
of the majority of the freemen of the 
province, or ot the delegates or depu- 
ties." 1i however prescribed no mode 
of assemWing the people, which was 
left to the p^prfetary. And he seems 
to have held that |he power of origina- 
ting and promulgating laws, resided in 
hirii no less than the power of rejecting' 



4^ 

jaus passed by the Legislature. Hence 
he rejected in mass the laws passed by 
the first assembly of the province, and 
as a substitute for them, sent a body of 
laws Irom England for their adoption, 
'which they on the other hand, as prompt- 
ly rejected (in 1637) for him, assserting 
with spirit their right of "advising, as- 
sentiiig to and approving the lews." 
From that time (he right ot the assembly 
to originate laws does not seem to have 
been contested, and the proprietary's 
authority was in the general confined to 
the exercise of the power of rejecting 
such as he did not approve of, which 
power was generally delegated to the 
governors in the instructions given 
to them, but not so as to exclude 
the] proprietary from the exercise ot 
the tinal power of still rejecting 
them, if he pleased, although assent- 
ed to by the Governor. The gov- 
ernor's assent only gave effect to the 
laws, till the dissent of the proprietary, 
when they ceased to operate. 

.Assembling of the Legislature. — The 
proprietary also had the power of con- 
■vening, adjourning or proroguing the 
assemblies as he pleased, and also the 
power which he a longtime exercised, 



47 

of determining how they should be con^ 
stituted. Up to the time that the gov- 
ernment passed into the hands of Crom* 
^veil's commissioners there was no uni* 
form mode of convening th* assemblies: 
tiie warrants sometimes calling for them 
in person, or by proxy, or by deputy^ 
or without prescribing the mode of ap- 
pearance. After the restoration from 
the Protector's commissioners to the 
proprietary in 1650, lherie;ht of appear- 
ing by person or proxy wholy ceased, 
and from this period the distinct estab- 
lishment of thetrro houses, which had 
first been separated in 1650, became 
permanently established. The upper 
house consisted of coun-^-iilors to the 
governor and the lower house of dele- 
gates from the people. Thus from 165S 
to 1681 the elections for counties instead 
of for hundreds as heretofore, were re- 
gulated by warrants oj election issued 
for|each assembly,each county electing 
two, three or four delegates who were 
then summoned to attend by special 
tLTit. In 169"2 (during the suspension of 
the proprietary's government,) the or- 
ganization of the lower house, was set- 
tled by the act of 1692, (chapter 76) 
and so continued to be regulated by 



48 

kw, (1704 chapter 35, 1T08 chapter 5, 
1715 chapter 42, 1716 chapter li) until 
the adoption of our present government. 
These acts gave to each county four 
delegates and established uniform 
modes of election . By this constitution 
of the Legislature, although the" upper 
house was rather too dependant on the 
proprietary for encouragement of liber- 
ty of feeling; and although his power of 
assembling and proroguing the Legis- 
lature, gave him great authority, yet the 
House of Delegates seem to have aK 
ways watched with vigilance and suc- 
cess over the rights of the people. 

Ordinances, — The power of the Pro- 
prietary to pass ordinance.s does not 
seem to have ever been much exercised 
by him, and when attempted was gen- 
erally resisted by the people, by whom 
it was regarded as a mere police pow- 
er or power of legislating in very emer- 
gent cases. On two occasions, (one in 
1733 and one in 1770,) when the fet 
bill had been suffered to expire, it was 
continued by proclamations; hut still the 
exercise of this power was always re- 
sisted by the Lower House as violating 
the provision of the charter, which 
exempted the colonists from all taxes 



49 

and impositions whatever, except those 
which were H^ed by acts of Assembly. 
The Proprietary, however, does not 
seem to have ever attempted the abuse 
of this power, else, doubtless, he would 
have been resisted. Y\^hen lie did 
attempt the exercise of it, the excite- 
ment which it created in the province, 
showed the jealousy with which the 
people regarded it. 

ExecuiivQ Poivers. — Tlie proprietary 
liad all the powers that were exerciae A 
in the Palatinate of Durham, m Eng- 
land, which were almost as great a? 
those of Royalty itself. Not only this, 
but the charter also granted further 
special jurisdiction, rendering it the mosf 
ftmple and sovereign in its character or 
any grant ever emanating from tlie crown 
of England. The powers thus granted to 
the proprietary may be classed for our 
consideration, under the heads of civit 
mi'itary,ccleslasiical, or commerciaL 

Civil poivers ^v^'ppomlriunts. — The 
Proprietary had the sole right as well 
from the 7th sec. of the charter as from 
the Palatinate jurisdiction, of creating 
all offices, determining the duties of of- 
ficers, appointing all judges,justices and 
other functionaries, state or countv. 



DV 

whatsoever, in the province; and of (5 
'iabllshing all courts and determining, 
their jurisdiction, and mode of proceed- 
inii; Sfc. During the suspension of the 
jiroprietary government, in 1604. (ch. 
92.) some salutary restrictions were 
imposed upon t!iis unlimited power, as 
to residence 6fc of th'e otncers, wliich 
v/ere considered to continue in opera - 
tion also after the resiimptior. bv il.. 
Proprietary. 

The only limit or restriction whicr 
tiie people had upon the exercise oL 
tiiis power of appointment, was in the 
r'egu'.ntion of the fees and perquisite- 
of ofiice, which were deterniined by 
the acts of Assembly and which there - 
tore enabled them to exercise the reai 
^.ontrol over the functionaries, inasmucl-. 
t-s the laws regulating them were al- 
■•'ays temporary, bein-i" passed fur sho:' 
periods. 
It was Ly holding the purse strings tiiat 
^hey held a check over the proprietary 
'Ud hence they always made vigorouo 
'lid steady opposition to his continu- 
:>nce of the (ee bills by proclamation, 
under his oidinance power, knowing 
the usurpations to which it might lead' 
Titks — Pardoning Offences— Dr^fe?. » 



3ive JVar, — The Proprietary further isac 
the power of conferring titles, (wu;. 
the restriction that they should not b- 
i-uch as were then used m Englaiul;) o: 
pardoning ofiences, ar-d of defendin:^ 
ihe province by the erection of castle- 
and by carrying on of defensive \var, 
and trie like powers, the exercise of 
\v h i c h n e V e r see m s to h a v e f;i v e n m u c \ 
trouble to the people. 

Military FGwers.—The Proprieiat • 
power of carrvinfir on war was of smfw 
consequence unless the assembly shoui v 
grant the means so as to make it eBectui. 
and no subsidies, aids, custcnis, taxe> 
or impositions could be levied on th'^ 
|Tovince for any purpose wha^socvc: 
without the consent and approbation c 
the General Assembly. (1650 ch 25. 
>.jany acts were passed on the suhjec^ 
defining the ex'ent to which the I'ret^- 
laen of the province could be require ( 
io"go. and modifying the powers of tue 
pipjn'ietarvj by prescribing the mannc 
o-f or^L'^nizii^g armies, and discipiiniL... 
the militia. 

Under the Charter of Maryland Li^ 
nominal military authority was indet^: 
nuite extensive, beins; clothed with a; 
the powers of a Captain General, ar-'.: 



Oil 



52 

^i waLTin^ defensive war. But the Le • 
i:;ialature soon cuioccl this power by the 
I estrictior.s imposed and the regulations 
for the disciplining &c. of the raililia. 
Though he had the powei\. thev had 
the supplying of the means. For no 
subsidies or taxes could be imposed 
without their aid (act of IGD^ ch 65., 
mfide perpetual 1676 ch 2). Accord- 
ingly various acts have been passed re- 
^^lating the disciplining the militia; 
such as 1661 ch 8; 1G7G eh S: 1673, oi 
2; 16S1 ch 1; 169:3 ch 83, 1699 ch 47; 
J7C4 ch S7; 1715 ch 43 with its supple- 
ments 1722 ch 15; 1733 ch;7; 174S ch 
1 which was the militia law of the 
province until the Revolutioii. 

CoviYiurc'ial Pqivcvs. — The charter ol 
laryland, conferred the most extensive 
(. urnraerciul privileges on the "colony. 
allovv^ing all commodities, except such 
as were specially prohibited, to be im- 
poited into the province upon the 
ordinary customs (art 11;) and all 
articles whatsoever of its growth or 
produce to be exported, to any of the 
ports of England or Ireland, subject- 
only to the impositions and duties paid 
in similar cases by the inhabitants oi 
England (art 15.) And, (20th art) the 



53 

kings of England were prohibueu rruu-- 
imposing any taxes or impositions wi^at- 
ever ''upon the persons or propertj" o'' 
the inhcibitants being within the prti 
vince," a prohibition, \vhich the people 
of Maryland sooner resorted to the 
Revolution than allow to be violated 
or infringed upon as far as regarded 
the laying of taxes. As to the en- 
croachments upon her commerce, how- 
ever, Maryland, together with ti^e 
other colonies, was obliged to yield :r 
the navigation acts, although the Pro- 
prietary eydeavored to maintain that 
his colonists v/ere not bound to expc'- 
their tobacco to England or Ireland, o' 
give bond for that pur pose, if tliey paki 
the duty. But shortly after this, be- 
ing himself stripped of his province. tlie 
restrictions of the chaiter were violatec 
and I\Iarvland together with the othe:- 
colonies was obliged to submit to th' 
navigation acts, which place tlie carry 
ing trade in the hands of the niothi: 
country. 

Ecchslasltcal Poi'jcrs.— The Pio- 
prietary was entitled (fith art. ch.) to 
the patronage and advowson of all 
churches within the province and to 
ia.E^. churches, :hapels and places c^ 



54 

.vorship. The established religion ^vas 
first introduced into the colony diinn^ 
the suspension of the Pioprietary's 
rights in 169:2, and the right of appoint^ 
ns; the incunibents were in the Pro- 
j)rietary though pluralities were for- 
bidden (1701 ch 1.) 

Religious toleration existed, and all 
hurches were allowed but none estah- 
li-hed. 

Tne oath of offi''e prescribed by th^.' 
Pto^jrietary to lii^s goverriors from 
1(>'>G to 1619 bound them to complete 
religious toieraticu of believers In 
( hiist. In IG49, ch 2, the same pnn- 
^ples were engrafted into the law. In 
•:G54, during the ascendency of Crom- 
well's conimisi-ituierK, an ordinance was 
Daj^sed prohibiting the profps'-ion and 
xercise of the Roman Catholic religion 
■It on the restoruion of the proprie- 
aty, toleration was again established 
.Mid:Continutd until the accession cf the 
^Protestant Association. In 1653, 
during the usurpation of Fendall, a 
•ecree of banishnent was pas?ed against 
!:ie Quakers, because they refused i^ 
rake tlie test oath; — thougii the govern- 
):ient proper can scarcely be held 
accountable for this. 



hi IGTG compiaints were tiia.le to 
be Crown, on the authority of a letter 
oi* the Rev. Mr. Yeo of Patuxent in 
Maryland, by the Arch. Bishop ci" 
Canterbury, representing the Province 
' f Maryland as in a deplorable condi- 
tio-n for want of an established ministry; 
there bein^ but three Protestant Minis- 
ters to 20.000 souls, ^'Chalmers 375.) 
The Proprietary was then in England, 
D.nd was enjoined to enforce the law^ 
'i.'j-ainst immoraliry, and (allhough a 
Catho'ic) to endeavor to procure ^i 
iTiaintenance for t'r;e support cf the 
,Ciergy of the Chiirc!) cf England, in 
•687 a qiw ivarranfo was issued against 
The charter of Mary by James 11, 
although the Proprietary vvias like him- 
self, a Catholic. The accession of a 
Protestant saved the Proprieiary fcr a 
while from the loss of his province. 

In 16S9 the Protestant Association 
got possess'cn of the government; — 
and 111 169"2 Maryland became a Royal 
Government under King William. — 
Although the Protestar.t Association 
'hanked bis majesty for redeeming them 
from the arbitrary will and pleasure 
of a tyrannical popish governmenr, 
under which they had so long groane'i:'' 



56 

et there seems to have been no real 
ause ot just complaint against tht^ 
• " a 1. 1 i o I i c Govern m e n t . 

in 1692, immediately after the arrival 
vf the Royal Governor, an Assembly 
v.'Rr^ called and the first act passed after 
that for the recognition of Vriiiiam and 
Mary, was one "forllic service of Al- 
mighty God, and the establishment of 
the Protestant Religion in the Pro- 
vince." Thus was t'ae Church of Eng- 
hnd first intfodiiced bylaw into jMary- 
[and, and so continued the Established 
Church until the Revolution.. 

In iG9i Nicholson became Governor 
rind being a great promoter and en- 
t'ourager of the clergy, the erthodos 
Churches became crowded as full as 
tiiey could hold* 

Not sitisiied with the act above 
r.liuded to the next act was.that of 1704. 
Oil 59, to prevent 'Hhe growth of 
Popery," by which mass ^vas prohibi- 
ted, Catholics v.'cre prohibiied from 
engaging in the instruction of youths, 
and the protestant children of Papists 
might compel their parents to atibrd 
them a subsistence. Though this act 
was not to apply to priests exercisins 
these functions in r^i^^t? i^MJ^lii^^^ - 



0/ 

Successive acts v/ere passed upon the 
subject in 1704, ch 95; 1706 ch 9: 
IT07 ch 6, which seems to have been 
l-^^ssed at the instance of the crown and 
.:spended all prosecutions in the cases 
'.xcepted. 

In 1718, eh 4, this act was repealed, 
because, as it asserts, bj the 11th ^^'^^'■ 
U- William 3rd, ch 4, sufficient pro- 
vision is made to prevent the growth 
' f Poperv, in this province, as well as 
(iiroughout all his majesty's domin:ons. 

As to protestant dissenters, immedia- 
tely after the Revolution they were 
j-;ersecuted almost as much as <he 
Ciitholics. But in 1702, ch J, the 
I>rovisions of the English toleration act 
vv-ere expressly extended to the pro- 
testants of the province; — and the 
quakers v/ere allowed to make their 
affii'mation as by 7lh V/illiam HI, and 
again in 1706, ch 8, the law was 
afiirraed, and thus the Catholics alone 
wtie left subject to persecution, in a. 
?^ate founded by them, and in which 
all religions had been toleiated by 
them- 

Charles Calvert died in 1714, leav» 
ins bis rights to his son, Benedict 
L^cr^^rd Ci''v'ir-.. v.!-o wc^ the ^vrt 



58 

Proiostant Proprietor, but \^•ho died in 
a short time, leavins; his title in 171 J, 
to his infant son Charles Calvert, who. 
lieing also a Protestant, was allowed t > 
take pcssessioii of his inheritance, a!'tv. 
an interruption ot the claims cf !:;• 
Taniily because of their Cati'.olic rcli'j^^o 
for twenty six years. 

Soon alter his accession the test oati • 
were int:oauced so as more eiTect' :.;. 
to guard against the Caliiolics. 

In ITO-i, ch 11, a test oath had be. 
lequired.but on the accession of Georu • 
1, to guard against the Pretenrler, nev/ 
test oaths weie established in England - 
which paved the way for the introduc 
tion of the same in Slaryland; in 17 lo 
ch 30, test oatl.s were required from ali 
ofiicers, which required the acknov.- 
ledgenient of the disbelief of tlse doc- 
trine of transub5tanliati;)n, and whicn 
also rendei-ed necessary the oaths o 
allegiance, abhorrency and abjuratio:) 
These disqualifications were still furtiie: 
extended by act of tilS, ch Jjwhicii 
tendered Catholics incapable of votin.->; 
unless they took the prescribed te^: 
oaths &cj— hence, they continued to 
be deprived not only of the ptiviles; 
cf holdinz office, but also ' of votix'v 



59 

.own to the time of the Revolution; 

,'jst previous to which, the political 

essays of the clay reproached Charles 

Carroll of Carrolltoii with his dis- 

anehisement, as being "one who do'h 

lOt enjoy the privilege of oiTering his' 

'jny vote at an election," but this dis- 

. race the 33rd section of the bill of 

i'ights wipetl clean out by declarinp; 

■hat it is the duty of e^^■eIy man- to 

"orship God, in such manner as be 

hiuks mas': acceptable to him." After 

.:e adoption of that bill, all Christians 

oelieving in a future state of reward? 

and punishm.ents v/ere admitted egvialij 

T of5ce. 



CHAPTER II. 

Personal High IS ajs'd Revenue -; 
THE Proprietary. — Let us now adve; 
briefly to the Personal Rights a'u 
Revenues of the Propuefary. 

Ownership of the Soil. — The Fi 
prietary not only had jurisdiction ov; 
the Province as its governor, but v.-, 
filso the owner of the soil: and hene< 
when stripped of his government froi 
16S9 to 1716, he still remained ' . 
possession of his rights as owner of t' 
soil. 

The whole of the land of the pro- 
vince was granted to him to be held 
in free and common socage, and of 
course he had the right to d'spose 
the same, as he saw proper, and accor-.: 
ing to his own conditions; aright whicii 
he continued to excrc-ise down to the 
time of the Revolution, granting out 
the lands,as he deemed most expedient, 
according to his ''Conditions of Planta- 
tion," "Proclamations*' and "Instruc- 
tions,-' — a right v/hich he still exer- 
cised, when stripped of the jurisdictio- 



61 

<)f the Provirxce. 

His Revenue from the Lands. — The - 
proprietarj's revenue from lands con- 
sisted of quit rents, caution money. 
paid at the time of the grant, alienatlor 
tines, including fines upon devise.s. 
- Quit Money. — The quit rents v.ere 
^the annual rents which the Proprie- 
tary reserved in his grants, to be paic 
him by the tenants, and v/ere regula- 
ted from time to time by his prociama 
tions and instructions, according tj the 
value of the lands. At first these rent?" 
v;ere payable in wheat, but after lG3u 
Ihey v.'-ere paid in money or the pro- 
ducts of the country at the option of the 
Proprietary. The payment of quit 
rents v/as attended v»'ilh much incoU' 
venience and oppression to the people, 
and in 1671 (ch 11) was commuted for 
payment in tobacco, by imposing a duty 
of tv;o shillings on all exported tobacco, 
one half to be paid to the proprietary 
and one half for ^^aq defence of the 
province;— this was to be paid to the 
proprietary la consideration of his 
agreeing to receive tobacco lor his quit 
rents and alienation fines. This con- 
tinued till 1717, vvhen the assembly 
bought out the Proprietaiy's right by 



62 

allowing as a compcnsatioi: t'liereiore 
and in lieu of it, a duty on all exported 
t:obacco "in full discharge of all hi^ 
quit rents and alienation fines." This 
net expired in J733, after v/hich, dowii- 
to the Revolution, the quit rents coi.- 
t.nued payable to the proprietary a. 
cording to the giants. The aSsemb • 
frequently endeavored to renew tl. 
commutation, but without success,— 
The nett revenue from them was esti- 
mated in 1770 to be about £7,500, 

Caution Money. — At the first settl. - 
ment of the Province, to encouragt 
emigration to itj every seitler w"as 
allowed a certain quantify of land, and 
only had to pay whatever quit rent, the 
"conditicn of plantations"' called for.—- 
But as the land became n^iOre valuali . 
in the year 16S3, a new system was 
adopted, under vvhich whosoever wish- 
ed to sue out a warrant for lands, was 
obliged first to pay a portion of money 
R5 caution money, the amount ol which 
was regulated by the proprietary's- in- 
structions, And this system of grant- 
ing lands has continued down to the 
present day. 

^illitnal'ion Fines. — These fines, orisi- 
r \d in the feudal system, and w^eit 



63 

paid by tiie tenant for the right of alien- 
ing his land, as an incident toconimoM 
socage lenuje. The first noti :e of them 
ui the colony is in llie conditions of 
plantation of 2-2nd Sep, 165S, which 
directed"! hat in all future grants there 
ghoiild be reserved upon the patent 
one year's rent for a fine, to be paid 
upon every alienation of the. bind 
granted, such rent being estimated by 
tLfee rent reserved as quit rents, — tlie 
alienation to be entered upon the re- 
cords of the provincial court, or those of- 
tlie county vvhere the land lay, and t^i\e' 
ir.ii paid before the alienation, or el'^e 
t'liC alienation voi^l. The coniinutation 
for alienations was included in act of 
1671 (ch 11) and 1717 (ch 7,) widely 
having expired in 1733, the alienation 
fknes became again payable to the pro=- 
prietary, and so continued to the time 
o^f the Revolution. Alienation tines 
were also payable on demises, but.being 
considered a great greivance, Were 
olteily abolished with the consent of 
tfee Proprietary in 1742. 

Revenue from other sources. — Other 
saurces of Revenue to the proprietarv 
Vv-ere principally the port or iorniage 
d'di>j-\hQ t0!)acco duties and fines, fo?- 



54 

feitures and amercements. 

The Port or tonnage tiwf^/.was a duty, 
imposed by act ot" 1640 (ch ]) on 
tocacco, wines, &c exported, to enable 
the proprietary to defray the expenses 
incident to Clayborne and Inglis' re- 
bellion. In 1661 (ch 7) this act was 
repealed and in place of it, a duty o\ 
' 1 i-2 Hjs powder and Slbs of shot laid 
for the proprietary ''on ail vessels 
trading to the province not owned m 
It, having a deck flush fore and aft,'' 
which duty v/as soon commuted for a 
money duty at 14d per ton. .r\t the 
Protestant revolution, the crown de- 
ided that this duty was a part of the 
proprietary s private revenue and as 
such did not pass from him with the 
government; — he therefore continued 
to collect it till his restoration in 17 !5, 
and so on v/ithout difficulty till 1739, 
from v.'hich time the assembly began to 
dispute his right to it and continued to 
wage against it an unceasing; war, until 
the Revolution, without however being 
able to deprive him of it. It was esti- 
mated in 1765 at from 900 to i21,20O 
'-er annum. 

Tobacco Duty.^lw 1671 (ch 11,) 
a dutv of 2s sterling perlihd-, was im^ 



65 

posed upon all tobacco exported, one 
half to be given for the defence of the 
province, and the other half for the 
proprietary's own use, — in considera- 
tion of his agreeinj^ to receive toba^Cco 
for his quit rents and alienation fines, 
at the rate of 2d per lb. During the 
time of the royal government his title 
to it was sustained and he continued to 
collect it for his o'vn use. Finally, in 
1717 (ch. 7.) it was bought out by the 
assembly, by allowing in lieu of it a duty 
on tobacco exported, which continued 
till the act expired in 173'2. During 
the Royal Government, in 1704 (ch 42,) 
It was given to the Queen for the sup- 
port of the government over the pro- 
vince, and principally applied to the 
support of the royal governor. In^l739 
the propriety of the tax began to be 
questioned, and from that time to the 
Kevolution, the assembly waged a con- 
tinual war against the proprietary's 
right to it; but he continued to collect 
it. From 1759 to 1765 the annual 
amount ot it was about ^£1543. 

Fines, Forfniures and ^Amerciaments. 
The common law fines, forfeitures and 
amerciaments belonged to the proprie^ 
5 



66 

tary, as the head of the government of 
the province, and whenever h< i»asi'd 
to act as such, they ceased to ! « iorg 
to him. The amerciaments v^e? :■■- 
gulated by the act ot 17'23 ch i:^. u;.utr 
which act those in the counly touits 
were applied to county charges; -am] 
those in the provincial courts were diS° 
posed of, as the governor and c ini il 
might direct. At first the ameu la- 
ments Sfc. were applied as a proprie- 
tary fund in which the public had no 
interest; but in 1745 the assembly 
solemnly determined that they were a 
public fund and to be apprepriated to 
the support of the government. It 
then became a standing cause of com- 
plaint which never ceased in the colony 
until the time of the revolution. From 
1659 to 1765 they yielded an annual 
average amount of 7130lbs of tobacco. 
His Personal Rights. — One of the 
personal rights of the proprietary was, 
a preference ra the payment of all debts 
due to him. He also exercised the 
right of suing in his own courts, (2nd 
H. & Mc H. 345,359.) Since the 
Hevolution,it has been decided that he 
was within the operation of the statutes 
of limitation, although not expressly 



iiamed (2 Har and Mc H. 138; 1 

Har and J- 71) though before the Rev- 
olution a contrary opinion was main- 
tained (1 H. and Mc. H. 151; 2nd 
Har and Mc H. 279; 1 Har. and J. 
82,96.) 

l- Proprietary's Revenue. — His quit 
rents in 1770 were estimated at say 
iB7,500j caution money considerable, 
though amount not known; alienation 
fines (abolished in 1742), amount not 
known; tonnage dutyjn 1766,estimated 
at from ^£900 to ^£1200 per annum; 
tobacco duty, in 1765, say ^£1543, fines 
forfeitures and amerciaments, in 1765, 
say 7130 lbs tobacco; all of which taxes 
have been gotten rid of by the Revolu- 
tion^of 4th July 1776.; 

(During the first two or three years 
of establishing the colony, the Proprie, 
tary spent ^640 000 in its support and 
maintenance.) 

• Currency. — In 1661 (ch 4) a mint 
was established in Maryland for the 
coining of shillings. This was an 
assumption of royal powers by the 
Proprietary. In 1676 the law esta- 
blishing it was made perpetual. It 
probably did not go into operation ex- 
tensively, for in 1686 an act was passed 



68 

entitled "an act for the advancement oi 
coins." This act established the pro- 
vincial currenc) instead of the sterling. 
Under this act New England shillings 
and six pences were to be taken as 
sterling at their denominated value. 



CHAPTER in. 

PROPRIETARIES OF MARYLAND, 

George Calvert, with whom the : 
design of obtaining and colonizing 
the province originated, first applied 
for the charter of Maryland. He lived 
only to see the difficulties removed, 
and to leave to his heii* a title to the 
grant, perfected in all but its legal 
forms. We find the following account 
of him in McMahon's Maryland. — 
Calvert who was then the f< under of 
the title and the fortunes of his family 
was born in Yorkshire in 1582. At 
an early age he became the Secretary 
of Sir Robert Cecil, thi'ohgh whose 
influence and patronage he was made 
Clerk to the privy council, and ul- 
timately became Secretary of State to 
James I. The latter office he resigned 
in 1642, because of his conversion to 
file principles of the Roman Catholic 
I^eligibn. Notwithstanding his avowal 
of these, and his resignation, he seems 
to have lost none ot* the royal favor 
^vhich he previously enjoyed, inasmuch 



70 

fts he was continued in the Piiry Coun- 
cil, and received in the succeeding year 
the honors of knighthood, with the ti- 
tle of Baron of Baltimore, in the king- 
dom of Ireland. He had represented 
Yorkshire in Parliament, and was at 
the time of receiving knighthood, the 
representative of the University of Ox- 
ford. During his Secretaryship he ob- 
tained a g;rant of the province of Ava- 
lon, in Newfoundland, uhere he made 
some efforts at a settlement, which, al- 
though thy did not answer his expecta- 
tions, instead of repressing his ardor for 
projects of colonization, had only the 
effect of directing his enterprising spir- 
it in search of some more favorable loca- 
tion. Animated by this desire, he vis- 
ited Virginia, and his sagacity at once 
perceived the advantages which were 
likely to result from settlements upon 
the Chesapeake Bay, and the facilities 
for their establishment presented by the 
adjacent country, of which the colonists 
of Virginia had availed themselves 
only, by the establishment of a few 
trading houses. On his return to 
England, he proffered his application 
for the grant of the province of Mary- 
land, and sustained, as it was, by t^e. 



71 

consideration of distinguished service?, 
untiring enterprise, and great moral 
worth, it was readily acceded to by the 
pliant king Charles, who never knew 
how to refuse the requests of favorites. 
It has been inferred by some, from the 
tenor of the charter itself, and the ex- 
treme care with which the rights of 
the proprietary are guarded by it,whilst 
the prerogatives of the crown and the 
eminent dominion of the mother coun- 
try, are almost as cautiously excluded 
from view, that it was the work of 
Calvert himself: but, be that as it may, 
there is but little doubt that the facile 
Charles permitted him to dictate its 
terms. Early in 1633, and when his 
charter was just ready for its passage 
under the great seal, he died, leaving 
fruition of his grant to his son and heir, 
Cecilius Ciiiverf, to whom the charter 
of Marylatid was finally granted ou the 
20th of Juns, 1632." 

Cecilius Calvert, Id Lord Baltimore, 
the first Proprietary of Maryland, re- 
ceived the charter in 1632, died on 
30th November 1675,and was succeed- 
ded in his titles and estate by his son 
and heir, Charles Calvert, who was at 
the time Governor of Maryland. He 



n 

did not himself come over to the Pro* 
vince. In 1645, Clayborne and Inglis' 
rebellion was successful against him for 
a year or two. From about 1653 to 
1656 or 1660 l^is government was usur- 
ped by Jhe Commonwealth's commis- 
sioners. His character, says the his- 
torian, has come down to us indentified 
in his acts and in the lansjuage of his- 
'lorians, "witli religious liberty and re- 
spect^for the rights of the people." — 
"Never," sajs Dr. Ramse3s"*-'id a- peo- 
ply enjoy more happiness, than the 
people of Maryland, under Cecilius, 
the father of the Province." 

Charles Calverl, son of Cecilius^ 3d 
Lord Balfimore,c?imQ out to the Colony 
as Governor in 166:i, and remained 
until the death of his father in 1675. — 
He became the Proprietary in 1676, 
but died stripped of his government 
because of being a Catholic. On be- 
coming proprietor in 1676^ he went to 
England and returned to the Province 
in 1680; in 1681 he again returned to 
England, where he died soon after the 
accession of James II. In 1687 a quo 
warranto was issued by King James 
agsinst his charter, but the dethron- 
meut ot that monarch prevented its 



73 

less. la 1<589 ths deputies of the 
Province surrendered, at the garrison, 
of Mattapony, to the "Protestant Asso- 
ciation," an association formed in the 
Province tor asserting the r^ght of. 
William and Mar}- to tha Province of ■ 
Maryland, and all the Enj^jlish domia- 
ions, and of which John Coode was the. 
leader. King William sanctioned the 
revolution, and thus Maryland contin- 
'led under the convention till 169-2, 
when it became a Royal Government, 
and remained under the crown till 
1716, and was administered by Gover- 
nors appoirited by the crown. Charles 
Calvert died on the 20th February 
1711, a,f^ed 84. Continuin'^ a. Catholic 
to the time of his death, he remained 
in the possession of his private property, 
but was deprived of the jurisdiction 
over the colony, which devolved to his 
son Benedict. 

Benedict Leonard Ccdvert, at the in- 
stance of his father, and to prevent his 
disfranchisement, embraced the doc- 
trines of the established church. He 
thereupon became the Proprietary, but 
died almost as soon as recognized. 

Charles Calvert, Lord Baltimore (the 
Efth of that titJeJ the son of Benedict 



74 

Ijecame the proprietor in 1715, wh\'i€ 
y(t an infant. He was educated in the 
Protestant church and the established 
religion and therefore his claims to the 
Province were fully sustained by 
George I. He visited the Province in 
1732, and returned in 1733. For 36 
years he governed the Province, with a 
spirit that acquired for his adminis- 
tration, the general character of virtue 
and moderation. 

Frederick. — By the death of Charles 
Lord Baltimore, the government t fell 
into the hands of his infant son Fred- 
erick, in 1751, who continued to enjoy 
it till his death in 1771. He never 
visited the Province and did not 
possess the same hold on the affections 
of the colonists as his ancestors. — 
During his time the Colony was violent- 
ly agitated by the numerous political 
questions then discussed, and the peo- 
ple maintained their rights with great 
vigor. 

Henry Harford, nenthccBme {he pro- 
prietor by devise, but his govern- 
ment had a short duration, as itteimina- 
ted with the American Revolution in 
1777. He was an illegitimate, at the 
time of his succession, a minor, and ^ 



75 

stranger, and without any' personU 
daims on the affections of the coliJJDy, 






A SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF MARY- 
LAND. 

The history of Maryland, from its 
settlement in 1634 to the Revolution in 
1776, embracing a period of two hun- 
dred and forty two years, ha?, for the 
sake ot perspicuity, been divided into 
three prominent periods or eras. 

The first era, commencing with the 
colonization, extends down to the ex- 
pulsion of King James II from the 
throne of England and the commence- 
ment of the protestant dynasty in that 
countiy, in the year I6S8, soon after 
which time the'Protestant Association' 
commenced to rule in the Province. 

The second era extends from this 
period, to the ovei throw of the ^'Protes- 
tant Association" in the Province^ and 



77 

the restoration of tke proprietary g^otr- 
ernment in 1715. , 

The third era extends from 17 lo to 
the treaty of Paris in 1763; after which 
commences the Revolutionary period. 



FIRST ERA. 

' Ft'dm the Colonization in 1632 to the 
expuhionof James, 1688.—The death 
^f George Calvert, the Baron of Balti- 
more, just about the time that the grant 
to him of the province of Maryland was 
about being perfected, frustrated the 
plan which he, no doubt, had m vieW of 
himself settling the colony of Maryland, 
n a region where he might enjoy, m its 
full liberty, the exercise of the Catholic 
religion, to which he had become a con- 
cert. The grant was then issued to 
Ceciliiis Calvert, his son, who ori- 
. ginally intended to accompany the 
expedition himself, but abandoTiing this 
intention, confided the conduct of the 
settlers, consisting of about two hun- 
dred Roman Catholic families, to his 
btolhar^l Leonard Calvert. On the 
%2d November il633, the colony em- 
bark^^d trom the Isle ol Wight, and 



78^ 

jcached Point Comfort, in Virginia, o^ 
the 24th February following. Continu- 
ing up the Potomae, the colony dis- 
embarked at the town of Yaocomoco, 
on the 27th March 1634 and took pos- 
session of it, by the name of St. Mary's, 
and founded the city of St. Mary's. — 
It is stated that during the first two or 
three years of the settlement of the 
colony, the proprietor, Cecilius, spent 
upwards of i£40,000 upon it. The con- 
veniences which were thus procured, 
the wise regulations which were adop- 
ted for the government of the colony, 
the humanity of the settlers towards 
the natives, and the freedom of religious 
opinion tolerated, all conduced to place 
the settlers soon in a flourishing con* 
dition. One of the earliest evils that 
the colony had to contend with was, 
on the one*^ hand, the dissatisfaction of 
Viiginia, the settlers of which consider- 
ed the grant to Lord Baltimore as a 
kind of encroachment upon their do- 
minion, and, on the other, the hostility 
of Clayborne, who had already, under 
the partial jurisdiction of Virginia,made 
a settlement on Kent Island. This man 
continued his hostility to the proprie- 
tary during the first tweny fire yean 



79 

oi the settlement; iu 1642, exciting an 
Indian War, against it, and iu 1644, 
raising the rebellion at present known 
as Claybcrnes and Ingh^s rebellion, 
the latter of whom had been sometime 
before procli\iQied a traitor to the King* 
It IS supposed that they advocated the 
parliament cause. In 1645 the rebels 
bucceeded in driving Leonard Calvert, 
the governor into Virginia; but the 
government of the proprietary was 
again restored in 1646, the early re- 
cords of the province having been en- 
tirely destroyed during the rule of the 
usurpers. The colony did not take 
any part in the dissentions of the 
motlier country, though from the im- 
mature proclamation of Charles II, by 
Gov. Greene, on tlie death of Charles 
the first, it may be susposed that their 
feelings were with the loyalists. They 
however took no further part in the 
controversy and did nothing to disturb 
the dominant party. In 1651 a com- 
mission was issued from parliament to 
four persons among whom was Clay- 
borne to reduce all the planiations 
within the Chesapeake Bay to their 
due obedience to ths parliament of the 
^oQimonwealth of England. They de- 



80 

manded ot Stone, then governor of 
Maryland, a recognition of the authority 
of parliament. He at first refused, but 
finding opposition vain, at length effect- 
ed an arrangement with the commis- 
sioners, by which he and those of his 
council were permitted to exercise their 
powers, saving his oath of fealty to the 
proprietary until the pleasure of the 
commonwealth should be known. As 
soon as Stone received intelligence of 
the elevation of Cromwell to the pro- 
tectorate, he ordered him to be pro- 
claimed but Clayborne still acting m 
the name of the commonwealth, alleged 
an intention on his part to avail himself 
of the earliest opportunity for a relapse 
and hence claimed for himself and his 
coadjutors, the privilege of remodelling 
the government. Stone was obliged to 
submit, was divested of his government, 
and its administration was confided to 
the commissioners deriving their ap- 
pointment from Clayborne and his 
associates. Stone then made resist- 
ance, and a battle took place near the 
Patuxent, in which he was utterly de- 
feated, taken prisoner, and condemned 
to death, but was net extcuted, the 
soldiers refusing to perforin the service* 



81 

He, however, remained in prison during 
the greater part oi the protectorate.-^ 
At this time, Virginia, assisted by some 
of the adherents of the parliament, 
who were in power in Maryland, en- 
deavored to revive her old claims 
against the colony, and thus to deprive 
Baltimore of his charter, on the ground 
that it was obtained through mis- 
representation as to the earliest settle- 
ments and relying, to sustain hei claim^ 
on rights obtained by such settle- 
ments. But, the matter being referred 
to the committee on trade and planta- 
tions, a report was mode in favor of 
Baltimore's claim in 1656, and he again 
gX)t possession of his province in 1658. 
For the purpose of regaining this pos- 
session, Josias Feudal, who seems to 
have been a treacherous and turbulent 
spirit, was commissioned as governor in 
1656; and soon after in 1658, he suc- 
ceeded in obtaining possession of the 
power, the protectorate commissioners 
surrendering the province by agree- 
meiit into his hands. Having thus re- 
stored the proprietary government, in 
i659, he attempted to usurp possession 
of the government by surrendering to 
the assembly his commission from the 



8S 

proprietary and receiving another in 
lieu of it from them. But the proprie- 
tary commissioned is brother, Philip 
Calvert as governor, who soon succeed- 
ed in wrestinsj the government from 
the hands of Fendall, and then, as one 
of his first acts, proclaimed Charles 
the 11 as lawful King. In 1662, 
Charles Calvert^ the son of the proprie- 
tor, was sent out as the governor; and 
remained in the province nntil the death 
ot his father Ceeilius in 1675, when he 
became the proprietary and immediate- 
ly went to England. In 1676, a gen- 
eral revision of the laws, which had 
been much needed, took place, and 
those which were in force were de- 
finitely ascertained. 

In 1680 the proprietary returned from 
England, having successfully answered 
some of the objections urged against 
his government, and remained here 
until 1684, when the prerogative power 
ot the crown began to threaten the 
charter, and, the opposition of the pro- 
prietary to the oppressions of the 
mother country relative to the regula- 
tions of trade, which were made in 
defiance of his charter, rendered 
him obnoxious to the reigning sover- 



8a 

eign. During his absence he left the 
government in coraraission, to be ad- 
ministered in the name of his infant 
son Benedict Leonard Calvert. He 
never returned to the province, having 
arrived in the old country in time to 
witness the accession of James II, and, 
though himself a catholic, to encounter 
serious designs on his rights from a 
Catholic monarch which however were 
frustrated by the Protestant Revolu- 
tion. In 1677, a quo warranto was 
issued against his charter, but it was 
saved by the Protestant revolution 
which took place in 1688 and which 
arrested the course of the monarch in 
his stretch of Prerogative, and thus 
saved the charter. But in 1689, the 
Proprietary was divested of his govern- 
ment by the "Protestant Association," 
in the colony, which usurped and re- 
tained the power till 1715, and whose 
history we shall briefly detail in the 
next chapter. 



SECOND ERA* 

History of the Royal Governmer}:i 
from (1686) to the restoration of the 
Proprietary (17 15) — in 1689 an as- 
sociation was formed in the colony 
called *'j3?i association in arms for the 
defence of the Protestant religion, and 
for assisting the right of King Wi/liam 
and Queen Mary to the Province of 
Maryland and all the English domin- 
ions.^' It does not seem that there 
were many grievances to complain of at 
this time, though as there is a chasm in 
the records ot the province from 1688 
to 1693, the history of the times is not 
so full as to enable us to form our opin- 
ion upon the subject. The absence of 
the Proprietary from the colony, and 
the imprudent deputies in whose hands 
he had left the government during his 
absence, seem to have given the asso- 
ciation an opportunity to easily reduce it 
into their possession. The deputies 
made a resistance, but were captured 
in a garrison at Mattapony in 1689,and 
the administration was taken into the 
hands of JolmCoode and his confeder- 
ates. After the overthrow of the pro- 



85 

prietary governraentj the association 
called a convention, and transmitted to 
the king an account of their proceed- 
ings,in which they bring various charges 
against the proprietary as to his filling 
all his offices with Catholics, and appro- 
priating the churches to the. uses of 
idolatry, &c., charges which seem 
not to have been borne out by the facts. 
King William gave countenance to 
the revoJution, and the provinces re- 
mained under dominion of the conven- 
tion ti 1 169*2, when, in conformity to 
the wishes of the convention, he took 
the province under the Royal govern- 
ment, and placed at its head Sir Lionel 
Copley, as governor, who dissolved the 
convention. It was at this time that 
the church of England was established 
by law, and in 1704 (chapter 59) an 
act was passed to prevent the growth 
of popery in the province, and about 
1706 toleration was extended to all 
dissenters. During this deposition of 
the proprietary, although he was de- 
prived of his rights of government, yet 
he still continued in possession of his 
private rights, such as his right to the 
soil, and to the duties due him which, 
although sometimes encroached upoft, 



86 

yet where in the general lett in his 
hands. In 1694 ihe seat of government 
was removed trom Saint Mary's to 
Annapolis, which soon became a place 
of some consequence, while the former 
place fell into decay. In 1695 a Post 
office was established by Governor 
Nicholson, which ran from a point on 
the Potomac through Annapolis to 
Philadelphia, eight times a year. 

Early in the eighteenth century a 
project was set on foot in the mother 
country for the union of the colonies 
under one goveniment, but it met with 
great opposition in Maryland and was 
afterwards abandoned. In 1715, im- 
mediately after the restoration of the 
government to Lord Baltimore an 
attempt was again made in Parliament 
to destroy the charter, but it was re- 
monstrated against by the guardians of 
Lord Baltimore and was afterwards 
abandoned, and the proprietary of 
Maryland then remained in possessioti 
of the government until finally expelled 
by the Revolution. 



THIRD ERA. 

From the Rtstoraticn of the Proprie- 
tary (1716) to the Treaty of Parii 
(1763.) Charles Calvert died in 1714, 
and his son Benedict Leonard Calvert, 
who had embraced the doctrines of the 
Reformed Church, also died in 1715, 
leaving his title to his infant son Charles 
Calvert, who was educated in the 
doctrines of the Reformed Church. — 
Thus the causes of the suspension of the 
Proprietary goveinment ceasing to exist, 
the claims of the Baltimore family, vt^eie 
duly recognised by the new monarch, 
George I, and a commission issued 
^rom the Proprietor and his guardian 
to John Hart, the late Royal Governor 
^.of the province. From this period 
down to the treaty of Paris, there were 
few occurrences ot much interest trans- 
pi ring in the colony, — the disputes 
relative to the extension of the English 
statutes and the measures of the pro- 
prietary occupying a large place in the 
attention of the assembly. 

In 1751 Charles Lord |Baltimore, 
(the fifth of that title) died, by which 
the government of Maryland devolved 



88 

upon his infant son Frederick. 

In 1742 commissioners were appoint- 
ed to treat with the six Nations of In- 
dians to extinguish their claims to lands 
lying along the Susquehanna and the 
Potomac, by treaty, and in 1744 the 
treaty was signed at Lancaster by 
which their claims to the country were 
entirely and forever extinguished. 

During the French war of 1754, 
M<irjland was frequently called upon, 
and requisitons made on her for con- 
tributions,bnt not conceiving her&elf so 
immediately interested in the matter, 
she would not yield and make con- 
tributions to prevent a war which she 
did not deem likely to affect her own 
settlements; — tlu)ugh she yielded so far 
to the requisitions of the English 
government, as to send commissioners 
to a general convention at Albany with 
presents to secure the assistance of the 
Indians. The position of the French 
at Fort du Quesne, seeming \o manace 
the frontier with danger, liberal appro- 
priations were granted by Maryland to 
aid in defence of the frontier; — though 
violent disputes arose between the 
upper and lower houses as to the mode 
of assessment and taxation, which laat-» 



89 

^ for several years, especially the 
question as to the tax on convicts.— 
Maryland though sometimes apparently 
in danger, yet went through the war 
of 1756 without much real suffering 
and until the treaty of 1763 again re- 
stored peace to the colonies. 

THE REVOLUTIONARY PERIOD. 

From the Treaty of Pans (I763j te 
the Repeal of the Stamp old in 176G, 
and thence to the Revolution in 1776. — 
The treaty of Paris, once more gave 
quietness to England, and by removing 
the rival fovvei of France from the 
borders of the colonies, freed them 
from the continual apprehension of in- 
cursions of either those enemies skill- 
ed in the arts of civilized warfare, or 
from savage foes. The mother coun- 
try, having now the leisure, began to 
turn her attention to the more complete 
subjugation of the colonies, and to the 
means of rendering them more subser- 
vient to her will, and tributary to her 
interests, by the payment of internal 
taxes, as she had heretofore compelled 
them to be by her commercial regula- 
tions. 

In the histories of the times will be 



90 

found the successive steps which were 
taken by her to effect these ends. As 
long as the French living upon the 
borders of the colonies,and the savage (be 
could be instigated by the'n into their 
fearful incursions and depredations upon 
the colonial settlements and as long as 
she was herseli distracted by foreign 
troubles, she did not attempt to en- 
force subsidies from them, but merely 
made requisitians on them for supplies 
which were sometimes conformed to 
by them and sometimes disregarded. — 
Her object now wp.s to compel submis» 
sion to these dictates of her powei, by 
some settled law and prescribed regula- 
tions, and tlie quietness whicli now pre- 
vailed seemed to present a favorable 
opportunity to effect these purposes. 

Maryland, as before stated, had sub- 
mitted with the rest of the colonies to 
the navigation acts, and the restriction 
of her commerce, it was supposed, 
partly from the temper of the times in 
which these acts were passed, and 
partly from the acknowledgment of the 
right of parliament to regulate commetce 
and partly from a want of sufficient in- 
terest in^the matter and ability to make 
it a serious cause of war. But when 



91 

the attempt was reduced into form to 
also impose on the colonies a settled 
system of internal taxation by the 
stamp act, the opposition to it was 
strong and universal. Frequent attempts 
had been heretofore made in the mother 
country to bring the colonies into a 
more complete state of vassalage, and, 
in fact, the attempts in 1701 and 1714 
to destroy the charters and the proprie- 
tary governments, the bill introduced 
into parliament in 1748 to give the 
king's instructions the force of la%v, and 
make them obligatory on the colonies, 
and the plan for the uni«n of the colo- 
nies, in 1753, whereby the whole of 
them were to be governed by an English 
commissioner, stationed at New Yoikj 
with a standing force, may also be con- 
sidered as belonging to th« same series 
of measures which had for their object 
to reduce the colonies to more implicit 
submission, and which measures were 
to find their perfection in the stamp act^ 
now attempted to be imposed upon the 
country. 

These acts to restrain the commerce 
of the colonies, known as the Naviga- 
tion ac(s, alluded to above as having 
been snbmitted to by Maryland began 



92 

with the State. l-2th Charles H ch J8, 
which prescribed that all imports or 
exports to the colonies should he car- 
ried in English vessels, and prohibited 
the exportation of tobacco and some 
other articles to any other country than 
to England. 1 'e 15th Charles II. ch 
7. carried out the system, by prescrib- 
ing that every European commodity- 
should be shipped to the colonies only 
from England, and in English vessels. 
The-ioth Cbas. 11 ch 7 enacted, that 
if the articles were nut shipped 
direct to En_iand, then certain duties 
to be paid [>, the crown upon their ex- 
port to ofit-r parts of the English do- 
minions; liitended to regulate the trade 
between the co'ionies themselves. — 
Thus did she strive to become the sole 
carrier, mawu/acfurer, 'and engrosser of 
the trade of the colonies. 

Independent of the general principles, 
which weie acted upon in the colonies 
that taxation and representation should 
go hand in hand, the charter of Mary- 
land expressly exempted that colony 
from taxation. 

The course of Mar}-land in opposi- 
tion to the stamp act was such as at 
first to make it appear that she did not 



98 

feel the same strength of hostility against 
it as the other colonies. This resulted 
from the fact that the power of assemb- 
ling and proroguing the assemblies re- 
sided in the governor, and he probably 
wishing to prevent the exhibition of the 
popular feeling, continually kept the 
assembly prorogued from November 
1763 to September 1765. When, how- 
ever, it did get together, they indignant- 
ly remonstrated with the governor as to 
his conduct, and showed their feelings 
upon the subject by unanimously pas- 
sing resolutions, of the strongest and 
most decisive character against the 
stamp act. They also soon indicated 
their feelings by the publications which 
appeared in the Maryland Gazette, a 
paper whicb had been established at 
Annapolis in 1745, and by the treat- 
ment with which they received Hood, 
the person who had been appointed as 
stamp distributor, whom they soan 
compelled to take refuge in flight. 

The assembly ot Maryland also, 
immediately after its session, appointed 
commissioners to a general congress, 
which was called according to a cir- 
cular from the State of Massachusetts, 
to assemble at New York, to make' a 



94 

representation to his majesty and the 
parliament ol the condition, &c. of the 
colonies. 

This congress accordingly assembled 
and remonstrated, and their proceed- 
ings were unanimously approved by 
the assembly at its next session. The 
stamp paper having arrived in Maryland 
after being detained for a while far the 
sake of safety in the vessel, was landed, 
but not used in Maryland. True it did 
for a time prevent the operation of some 
of the offices of Maryland which were 
required to use it; but the county courts 
declared the act requiring its use un^ 
constitutional and void, and in 1766 a 
society was formed in Baltimore under 
the name of the "sons of Liberty^' which 
soon spread through the State, & which 
attending in body at the seat of govern^ 
ment requested the oflScers to proceed 
without the stamping paper; — a request 
which was complied with, and thus 
ended the operation of the stamp act in 
Maryland. Shortly afterwards, on the 
18th of March 1766, it was fully re- 
pealed by Great Britain, on the grounds 
that **its further continuance might be 
productive of consequences greatly de- 
trimental to the commercial interests of 



95 

Great Britain." The unanimity ot t]:=^ 
people of Maryland against the stamp 
act was perhaps greater than that in any 
other colony, and the disregard that 
they had been in the habit of paying to 
the requisitions of the authorities of the 
mother country, well prepared them to 
resist any attempts to impose taxes 
ypon them, in defiance of their eharter^ 
without tlieir assent. 

The Revolutionary period continu«- 

ED. Formation of State Government* 

From the Repeal of the Stamp j9ci 

(17fi6) to the Revolution and Formation 

of State Government (1776-7) 

Although the stamp act had been re- 
pealed in 1766, and a more favorable 
feeling evinced towards the colonies by 
the new administration in England on 
the defeat of Grenville and the accession 
ot Townsend, yet the favorite scheme 
of taxing the colonies had not been 
abandoned. In 1767, Parliament passed 
a new act imposing duties on paper, 
glass, tea, &,c., supposing that if the 
colonies would not submit to diiect 
taxation they might yet be willing to 
allow the regulation of commerce,which 
would result in effecting the aanao 



9B 

object. In this however, they were 
mistaken; for the object was at once 
perceived,and the remonstraoces against 
it were strong and loud. Massachusetts 
tood the lead in this opposition by her 
circulars and by arousing the other 
colonies to concerted opposition. At- 
tempts were made by the Ministry, in 
their cotomnnications with Governor 
Sharpe, to discountenance any "un- 
warrantable combinations" on the part 
of Maryland with the other colonies, 
by directing him to prorogue the assem- 
bly if it should manifest any such dis- 
|)Osition. The House however indig- 
nantly repelled the att?mpt to prohibit 
such combinations and when called 
together in 1768, the first thing after 
the passage of the act for laying this 
duty, they failed not to vindicate their 
rights, by appointing a committee to 
draft a petition to the king, by second- 
ing the Massachusetts Circular, and by 
insisting on their riglUs.with the great- 
est unanimity. In 1769 a meeting was 
called at Annapolis which was fully 
attended from the different counties, at 
which it was resolved to form non-im- 
portation Associations, and which was 
carried into operation with much strict- 



97 

iies» for a while, but gradually in course 
of the ensuing year was rendered in- 
effectual by tlv^ want of a ^ene»al co- 
operation, and was therefore shortly 
after, abandoned. 

About this time Maryland was much 
agitated by two questions relating to 
its own inteinal concerns, which filled 
the colony with excitement and were 
debated with more warmth and fervor 
and with more intelligence and skill 
from the talents of the ])arties who 
engaged in the controvei sy,thau perhaps 
any question had before called forth in 
the State. These questions were what 
were known by the names of the t'Pro' 
clamation AcV and the '^Vestry Ques- 
tion.^' The colony complained of the 
exorbitance of the fees of some of the 
offices of the colony, the abuses in their 
collection, and the uncertainty of the 
commutation, (that is, ^ here the fees 
payable in tobacco, were commuted for 
money.) The assembly had usually 
regulated the fees by temporary acts and 
thus held the power over the office- 
holders, who held their appointments 
frcm the proprietary. These acts were 
now allowed to expire, and in con- 
sequence, the governor issued h;s pro- 



98 

clamation, declaring that the fees should 
be regulated according to the expired 
acts. This excited the most intense 
opposition on the part of the people and 
gave place to warm discussions and 
essays from the most distinguished and 
learned raea of the province. Among 
those, who advocated the act were Mr. 
Daniel Dulany, one of the most talented 
and eminent lawyers in the colonies, 
and Mr. Hammond and others; while 
on the other side were arrayed Me«;srs. 
Samuel Chase, Charles Carroll, Paca, 
&c. The question continued to be 4he 
main topic of consideration until en- 
grossed in the still more exciting themes 
arising at the outbreak of the Revolu- 
tion. The people of course in their 
elections decided against the Procla- 
mation. 

The "Vestry act" was one of a 
kindred character. When the church 
of England became the established 
church in 1692, a tax of 40 lbs. of 
tobacco had been laid on each taxable 
for the support of the established clergy 
which was still further regulated in 
1702. In 1763 this tax was reduced to 
30 lbs of tobacco. But when the fee 
hill wassufiFered to exp're, the procU 



99 

tnation of the governor established again 
the more odious tax of 1702, which 
therefore created the greatest opposition. 
In 1773 by a kind of compromise, the 
poll tax was regulated at 30 lbs of 
tobacco or 4s. in money, — and thus the 
controversy was ended until the Revolu% 
tion finally cut off this tax entirely, 
rendering the clergy always afterwards 
dependant on the voluntary contribit- 
tions of the people for their support, 
the poll tax^being prohibited at the 
adoption of the new government. 

The attempt to tax the colonies by the 
imposition of duties, had now been 
abandoned by Great Britain, with the 
exception of the article of Tea, the 
duty on which was still maintained as a 
pledge of the supremacy of the mother 
country. The resolutions of the non- 
importation associations not to use it, 
still continuing in force, the trade in 
the article was diminished, and the 
attempts of the East India company, 
under the allowance of a drawback, to 
introduce it into Boston and other porti 
is too generally known to need further 
mention here. After the burning of 
the tea in that harbor, Boston was de- 
prived of its privileges as a port of 



100 

eatr}', and the rest ot the colonies, see- 
ing the tendency which this would have 
made common cause with her in this 
time of oppression. In all directions, 
the greatest excitement prevailed. At 
Annapolis, the like attempt to bring 
tea into the province created so much 
opposition that the people came together 
and compelled the person who had dared 
thus to insult the public feelings to make 
atonement, by himself applying the 
torch to the vessel in which it was 
brought. Public meetings were at onct 
called in all the counties of Maryland, 
ii)e deputies from which met at Anna- 
polis on the 22nd June 1774, in a con- 
venfiou whic[i continued in session to 
the 25th. By this convention, resolu- 
tions dignified and manly, expressive 
of their rights, and determination to 
maintain them, were passed, and five 
persons named to attend a general con- 
j;ress of the deputies of the colonies. 

This continental Congress according- 
ly assembled on the 6th September 
1774, at Philadelphia. A non-importa- 
tion association was recommended to be 
formed throughout the colonies, which 
was accordingly done. On the return 
of the Maryland Representatives, the 



lOi 

Maryland ConvenHon was again con- 
vened by their call, on the 21st 
November 1774, and an account of 
their proceedings given, which were 
approved of. The non-importation asso- 
ciation was approved of and measures 
taken by the appointment of committees- 
of Inspection and of Observation to 
render them effectual. 

In July 1775 the state convention 
finding that all efforts at reconciliation 
would prove unavailing, established a 
*'2)rovisional government," {ov the ad« 
ministration of affairs in the colony, 
until some more permanent system 
should be formed. The chief Execu- 
tive power was conaded to a committee 
of safety, consisting of sixteen members 
elected by the convention. The supreme 
power was reposed in the Provincial 
Convention, oi five delegates from each 
county; and the county authorities were 
comnutted to committees of observatior, 
elected annually in each county. 

This government with some modifica- 
tions continued in force until the estab- 
lishment of the present form of govern- 
ment in 1776. 

When the proposition came distinct- 
ly forward and was presented to the 



lOS 

consideration of the convention as to 
the Declaration of Independence, Marj - 
land soon agreed to it, although for a 
long time desirous of conciliation. 

On the 6th of July 1775, a state 
Declaration of Independence was made, 
and formally proclaimed. 

The old convention, after the calling 
of a new convention for the establish- 
ment of a permanent government dissol- 
ved itselt on the 1st. August 1776. 

The new convention being formed, 
its members assembled at Annapolis on 
the 14th August 1776; and on the 10th 
September, the special committee re- 
ported the new form of government and 
charter of rights, which were published. 
The convention adjourned to the 2nd 
October, when they again met, and 
adopted the constitution on the 8th and 
the Declaration of R^-ghts on the 3d 
November, and finally adjourned. 

The first assembly of Md. under the 
new constitution then met on the 5th 
February 1777, and the new govern- 
ment was fully organized on the 13th 
and 14th of that month, by the election 
oj^horaas Johnson, as the first governor 
and of five councilmen. And thus was 
the government of Maryland started. 



into full operation. 

Having thus run briefly through with 
the history of the state up to the period 
of the Revolution let us next glance 
over the Introduction of the Common 
and Statute law into the state and then 
at the leading objects of Legislation in 
the state st various times; and also 
sketch out the history of the conneclion 
of the state with the General Govern- 
went, and the formation ol the U. S, 
Constitution. 



mm^^u^mA^m^i 



CHAPTER I. 

TTIE COMMON AND STATUTE LAWS. 

Histoi^y of the IrJTQduclion of the 
English Common Law into Maryland. 
In the first assembly of v.hose p!0- 
ceedings, we have any record, com- 
menced the discussion of the question 
*'By tihat laivs the colony should he 
governed." The proprietary trans- 
mitted a body of laws from England for 
adoption by the assembly, but they 
were rejected by that body. In the 
early settlement of the colony, the com- 
mon law was considered as in fort e, ej?- 
cept where its operation extended to 
life^ member, or freehold which by the 
charter, could not be taken away e3?cept 
by some expreas law of the province. — 
Several acts were passed upon the sub- 
je#, and that of 1062, chapter 3, direct, 
ed that justice should be administered 
accordins; to the laws and statutes of 



105 

England if pleaded and produced, ^-and 
that all courts should judge of the right 
pleading and inconsistency of the said 
laws with the good of the province, 
according to the best of their judgment 
skill and cunning.'- This act engrafted 
the common law into the jurisdiction 
of the province, and although it soon 
ceased in its operation, yet the com- 
missions issued to the judges sanctioned 
it as a rule of jurisdiction, and the com- 
mon la\y then became in fact a part of 
the law of the province. Nor does 
this right cf the people to the privilege 
of the common law seem to have ever 
come into question— for in the address 
of the lower house to th^ proprietary 
in 1725, they say ''but since we men- 
tion the common law, we beg leave to 
observe concerning it, tliat we do not 
apprehend your lordship denies us the 
benefit of it, as being (by the common 
received opinion of the best Judges) 
allowed to be our right; but 'tis the 
statutes oi\ly you deny us." This right 
ho\?ever, was fully established at the 
adoption of the 3d Article of the Bill of 
Rii^hcs, which states ^'that the inhabitants 
ot Maryland were entitled to the com- 
mon law of England and the trial by 



106 

jury, according to the course oi that 
law." 

In the case of Slate vs. Buchanan^ 
prosecuted for a conspiracy, (5 H. ^ 
J. 357,8) and in which the prosecution 
was sustained, the question as to the 
extent of the application of the English 
common law to our state is decided on 
and the principle laid down as follows; 

**It is a mistake to suppose that the 
decisions, subsequent to the charter, are 
expansions ot the common law, which 
is a system of principles not capable of 
expansion, but always existing and 
attaching to whatever particular cir- 
cumstances may arise and come within 
one or th^^ier ot them;" and in ad- 
verting to the argummt from non-user, 
ihey reply ^ "that as to the common law, 
unlike a positive or statute law, (the 
occasion or necessity for which may 
have long since passed by,) if there has 
been no necessity before for instituting 
such a prosecution as the present, no 
argument can be drawn from the non- 
user, for resting on principles whicii 
cannot become obsolete, it has always 
potentially existed, to be applied as 
occasion should arise;" and, in conclu- 
sion, they pronounce the existing rule 



107 

©^f application under the bill of rights, 
which cannot be better stated than in 
the words of the opinion. "The lan- 
guage ot the 3d section of the Bill of 
Rights, (says the opinion, in declaring 
the people of Maryland entitled to the 
common law,) has no reference to ad» 
judications in England anterior to the 
colonization, or to judicial adoptions 
here ot any part of the common law 
during the continuance of the colonial 
government: but to the common law in 
mass, as it existed here either poten- 
tially or practically, and as it prevailed 
in England at the time; except such 
portions of it as are inconsistent with 
the spirit of our present government, 
and the nature of our own present 
political institutions." 

^d. History of the introduction and 
opetaiionof the English Statute Laws 
in Maryland.^The nice distinctions 
which often exist between the siatute 
and common law do not se^m to have 
been always referred to in the broad 
discussion of the question, as to whether 
the English law was to be considered 
as in force in the province. The 
general rule which prevailed was, that 
in Criminal cases, not affecting life. 



108 

member, or freehold, the express 3awj 
of the province, if there were any[such 
governed; if there were none, then the 
laws or usages of England, in like cases. 
In civil cases, the decision was accord- 
iug to the acts and most general usage 
of the province; and if there were none 
such then according to the usages cf 
the English law, so far as they were 
applicable. The act of 1662 (chapter 
3) directed that where the laws of the 
province were silent, that justice should 
be adniinisteredj according ta the laws 
ot England, if pleaded and produced. 
And although, this act was subsequent- 
ly repealed yet, from the commissions o^ 
the judges, the exercise of the power 
seems to have been kept up and de- 
cisions given in conformity to the laws 
of England in cases where the statute* 
were made after the emigration as well 
as before, whenever the laws of the 
province were silent. Much legislation 
and controversy was had upon the sub- 
ject; the people of the province desiring 
to have the whole mass of the English 
statute law introduced at once, and the 
Proprietary contending that this was 
unreasonable, and that he wonld not 
consent to such a ";eneral introduction, 



109 

onless the jiidges were permitted to 
decide upon their consistency with the 
constitution of the Province. This 
opposition of the people arose from the 
repugnancy that existed on their part to 
giving him the exercise of the Veto 
power whicli he had over their legisla* 
tion; for they contended in such case 
'*they would "^then hold them (the right 
to the statutes) by the precarious tenure 
oi the Proprietary's pleasure, in yield- 
ing or withholding his assent/' 

About the year 17'2'2 the controversy 
as to the extension of the. statutes 
commenced to rage more warmly, 
dividing the colony into the "Court 
Party" and ''The Country Party, ' 
the latter of which contended for the 
introduction of all the statutes in a 
lump. After various discussions and 
disputes between the proprietar} and 
the House of Delegates, in which the 
iprm of the oath of the judges was 
brought into controversy, it svas finally 
compromised by the act of 173'2 chapter 
5, which received the proprietary's 
assent, and in which it was prescribed 
that* the acts and usasjes of the province 
should be the primary guide; and when 
these were silent, the decision should 



110 

be according to the laws, statutes and 
•reasonable customs of England as used 
and ]^racHsed within the province. — 
This allowed the future introduction ot 
English statutes, and thus it continued 
down to the Revolution, at which time 
the 3d section of the Bill of Rights, 
declared, "that the inhabitants of Mary* 
l*nd were entitled to the benefit of such 
English statutes as existed at the time 
of the first emigration, and were found 
applicable to their local and other 
circumstances; and of such others as 
have been since introduced, i>sed and 
practised upon in courts ot law and 
equity." In 1809 the legislature em- 
powered the Chancellor and Court of 
Appeals to report which statutes came 
under this definition, in conformity to 
which the Chancellor made the report 
spoken of in another place. 

When by English Parliament a 
statute was expressly declared to extend 
to the Province, it was of course held 
to be binding on the colony. 



CHAPTER 11/ 

LEGISLATION IN MARYLAND. 

It is sometimes useful to recur back 
to the past, and to note the various sub- 
jects of interest which have from time 
to time agitated the public mind, and 
see how one questioa gives piac*^ to an- 
other, and the violent disputes and con- 
troversies of oue ge«neration,upoa which, 
according to the controversialists, would 
seem to hang the fate of all posterity, 
are almost forgotten in the succeeding 
age. Still, however, their influence is 
felt in moulding the character and 
forming the habits of the people, who 
are affected by ihem. In Maryland, 
many of these questions,which at timei 
have threatened to convulse the state 
to its very foundation, are now only 
known to the antiquarian or the his* 
torian.and many subjects of the warmest 
and most angry controversy, once much 
debated, have b-een swept away with 
the Revoltition. Let us take a glance 
at some of the subjects which have 
occupied the minds of the people of 



112 

Maryland, and herein let us consider 
these changes in their chronological 
Older, noting the centuries in which 
they have taken place and their relation 
to either the Proprietary or colonial 
goverr.nient or to tke state Govern- 

In the first Assembly which conven- 
ed in the Province of Maryland in the 
year 1637. a question arose, as to the 
Utivs by uhich the colony should be 
governed, and this was tor a long time 
a leading subject of discussion and of 
violent controversy in the Legislature 
and among the people, and, there are 
few, we should suppose, who would b@ 
disposed to question its importance. — 
In the year 1638, tlie body of laws, 
transmitted by the Proprietary for the 
government of the Province were re- 
jected by the Legislature, which pre- 
ferred the making of their own laws.— 
In the year 1644 Clayborne and Ingle 
got possession of the colony and held it 
until 1646, during which time all the 
early records of the Province were lost, 
v,hich leaves a considerable hiatus in 
the legislative history of Maryland.^ 

In 1646, the port or tonnagt duty 
originated; and subsequently atibrded 



113 

some most acrid and violent con- 
troversies in the province, in 1649 they 
were exchanged for a duty upon to- 
bacco exported in Dutch vessels; in 
1661,1676. and 169-2 the subject of 
these duties were again and again dis- 
cussed, and in 1739 the complaints 
against them as oppressive and onerous, 
arose to a high pitch and no doubt con- 
tributed much to the dissatisfaction 
which prevailed against the system of 
government which thtii existed. 

About the year 1671, the amount of 
the Proprietary's quit rents and commu- 
tation money began to occupy much at- 
tention, which was again directed to 
the same subje<:t in 1717 and 1735, at 
which time great efforts were made to 
have it commuted; — The same subject 
also continued to be discussed in 1737, 
174-2 and 1744. 

In 1671, ch. 11, commenced the To- 
bacco duly for the support of the pro- 
prietary and defence ot the province, 
continued in 1674 and 1676; legislation 
on it was continued in J704, 1716,-17; 
it expired in 1732; in 1739 it began to 
be loudly complained of, and in 1750 
the coutroversy revived with much 
8 



114 

warmth. The Revolution put an end 
to this controversy. 

In the year 1676 on the death of Ce- 
cilius, Lord Baltimore, and the acces- 
sion of Charles Calvert, and just before 
his departure for England, a revision of 
the Laws of the Colony took place. — 
"At this assembly (says McMahon 215) 
the legislation of the province was res- 
cued from t'iC confusion and osbcurity 
which had characterized it for some 
years from the want of a regular ex- 
pression of the Proprietary will upon 
the acts from tirae to time passed, and 
from the enactment during that period 
of various acts upon the same subject, 
and tending to the same purpose. A 
general revision of the Laws then took 
place, under which those then in exis- 
tence and proper to be continued, were 
definitively ascertained" 1676 ch. I 

4-2. 

In the year 1683 the seat of govern' 
ment was removed from St. Mary's to 
the Ridge in Anne Arundel, but was 
again changed back to St. Mary's. — 
In 1694, it was removed to Annapolis; 
which was erected into a city in 1708. 

In the year 1696 a board of "Lord 
Commissioners for trade and Planta- 



115 

tions" were established in England 
uhosedutj it was to obtain full infor- 
mation as to the trade and general coti' 
di/ion of the colonies. In 1697 inqui- 
ries as to the statistics of Maryland 
were answered by the government ^rom 
which is derived the bi>dy of the 
statistics of the State during this period. 

In 1715 the La^v ot altachments was 
first introduced into the Md. system. 

From 17*22 to 173*2, a very warm 
contest was carried on between the 
Assembly and the Proprietary as to 
what English statutes were in torce in 
Maryland, which daring this period 
occupied much of the public attention 
(see McMahon 283). 

In 1722 also an important act for the 
regulation o^ fines and 'amercemm/s was 
passed; in 1745 it was determined that 
these were a public fund and not the 
property of the Proprietary; — an im- 
portant matter to the people of the 
Province. 

In the year 1739, the alienation fines 
(that is a fine paid the Proprietary at 
every transfer of property) were much 
complained of in the province and in 
1742 they were abolished. Indeed a- 
bout this period, the dissentions in the 



116 

Province as to llie Proprietary's Reve« 
nue became quite aggravated and his 
right to levy tonnage duties and other 
duties was discussed before the Assem- 
hly. 

In 1742, fines upon alienations and 
duties were relinquished by the Propri- 
etary; in 1747 Officer's fees were estab- 
lished by law; but the tobacco and 
tonnage duties were continued down to 
the time of the Revolution. 

In 1751-5 preparations were making 
in the province for the cnnimon defence 
and controversy ran high as to the mode 
of levying a tax for the defraying of 
the expenses of the war, and the dis- 
putes continued as to tlie right ot the 
Proprietor to the revenue of the colony. 

In the year 1756 the pas-sage of the 
starap act and tlie right of taxation oc» 
cupied the attention of the assembly; — 
resolutions were passed;- — members to 
the Congress were appointed, and the 
papers abounded with essays on the 
subject. 

In 1766, the Association of the Sons 
of Liberty was formed in the province 
against the stamp act. 

lu 1767-8, the Duty act and the 
jSoa-importation Associations occupied 



117 

the public attention. 

Ill 1770 came up the question as to 
Fees and the Vestry Bill, arising on the 
Proclamation of Governor Eden con- 
tinuing the old acts in force. These 
subjects engrossed the public attention 
until the Revolution superceded them. 

In 1774 the Maryland Convention 
met at Annapolis and the Association 
was adopted by it and encouraged,and 
in the next year, 1775, the Provisional 
Government was formed. 

In 1786, ch. 45, the mode of descent 
of property was regulated, and the pri- 
mogeniture lawsabolisljcd in Maryhna. 

In 1798 the present Testamentary 
system was est;'.b!i-hed in Maryland, 
and systematised. 

In the beginning of this century 
(1800) there seems to have been a 
singular usage to merely re-enact, in 
almost the same words a previous act 
(Evans' Prac. 245.) 

In 1801, ch. 90. white persons alone 
%vere allowed to vote, and in 1809 the 
property qualification was removed. 

In 1805 the present system of Coun- 
ty Courts, &c., was established, and in 
1609 the Penitentiary system was in- 
troduced and the criminal laws passed. 



118 

In 1814 the county Courfs were en- 
dowed with full equity jurisdiction. 

From 1811 to IS'lS the war with 
Great Biitain and the defence of the 
State occupied the public attention. — 
After the war, the difficulties of the 
times and the suspension of specie pay- 
ments by the Banks gave rise to some 
legislation. 

In 1820, ch. 191, the act to direct 
descents was newly arranged and sys- 
temalised. 

In 1827, ch. 104, the first appropri- 
ation was made towards the Internal 
Improvemtnt system, which had been 
much discussed for some years before. 
This subject contiiiued to occupy much 
of the public attention for some years, 
and in 1835-6 the gieat eight millinn 
oill was passed for the perfectino of the 
whole system; but direct taxation bad 
at last to be resorted to. 

In 1836 a radical change was made 
in the Constitution by a new organiza- 
tion of the Senate and an election of 
the Governor by the people; and by the 
abolition ofthe Council to the Governor. 



estallIsiied. 
CHAPTER I. 

fORMATION OF THE UNITED STATES 
GOVERNMENT. 

Frequent unions of the separate 
colonies which now compose the United 
States, had taken piace previous to the 
Revolution, and seemed to prepare the 
country for the more perfect union 
which took place subsequent to the 
Declaration of Independence and under 
which we now live. 

As early as 1G43 there v. as a union cf 
the colonies of Massachusetts, Pi) - 
mouth, Connecticut and New Havei), 
and two cosnmisjjioners were delegated 
from each colony to meet annually to 
deliberate en matters of common 
concern, and provide fu' the general 
defence. This confederacy existeJ 
for upwards of f >rty years and waa 
finally dissolved in 1G6G, about the 



120 

time that James II vacated all the New 
England chatter. 

Leagues were also sometimes entered 
int*") between the colonics for the pro • 
tection of the interior from the attacks 
of the Indians: — thu?, in 17*2-2, a Con- 
gress was held at Albany, and in 1754, 
at the instance of the board of (rade 
and plantations, commissioners assem- 
bled from all the New England States, 
as also from Pennsylvania and Alary- 
land, to con«.ider the bfst means el 
defending the country in case of a war 
with France. The Congress, however, 
when assemb'ed very naturally took a 
niore enlarged view of their duties, and 
entered into measures and projects (or 
the general welfare of the colonies in 
peace as well as war. The result of 
this was, that the j)eople became habit- 
uated to plans for concert of actio]^ and 
to tliat kind of self reliance which wns 
more fully developed at the time of the 
Revolution. This convention proposed 
a more intimate union of the colonies 
for defence and mutual aid and with 
power to levy import duties and taxes; 
but the people were not yet quite pre- 
pared for so bold a measure, and it was 
then rejected both by the crown and 



121 

every pro\incial assembly. 

The jealousy of the mother coimtry 
on the one hand, and the rivalship 
esistmg between the separate colonies, 
each one of which had always here* 
tofore looked to its own individual in- 
terests, may probably account for this 
general rejection of the proposition at 
this time. 

In 1765, when the first attempt was 
made by Great Britain on the rig;hts of 
the colonies, at the instance of Massa- 
chusetts, a congress assembled at New 
York, delegated from nine of the 
colonies, which published a bill of 
rights in which they declared the sole 
power of taxation to reside in the colo- 
nial legislatures. 

But in 1774 (September) a more 
general Congress, in which the twelve 
colonies were represented, took place 
at Philadelphia, and then boldly set 
forth their grievances and the oppres- 
sions that they had suffered in the un- 
just attempt made by the mother coun- 
try to tax them without their consent. 
They had no power or authority 
further than to recommend and advise, 
but, *'by their lives, their fortunes, and 
their sacred honors,'' th°y nobly bound 



122 

themselves to resist oppression and 
tyranny and to deliver down to their 

f)osterity the light to those blessings of 
iberty which they had enjoyed from 
their ancestors. 

In May 1775 Congress convened 
again at Philadelphia, and Georgia 
being now represented also, the ''old 
thirteen" stood boldly forward to I reast 
the Revolutionaiy storm, which was 
then commencing to rage ii\ Massachu- 
setts. This congress, being authorised 
by those who had sent them together 
to conceit and agree Ufon such mea- 
sures as might be proper to preserve 
the liberties of the country, proceeded 
to levy and organise an aimy, to con- 
tract debts, to prescribe rules for the 
government of the laud and naval 
forces, and to exercise a'l the other 
powers of sovereignty, and (o complete 
their des-ign?, on the 4th of July 1776, 
they marked a new epoch in the liistory 
ot the colonies by declaring their in- 
dependence of tlie Molhe'- country — 
In this declaration tliev set forth the 
grievances under which they labored 
and the reasons which induced tliem to 
take a separate stand among tlie naticns 
of the earth. 



123 

As early as June 1776 Congress 
undertook to propose articles of con- 
rederation and from the intrinsic difficul- 
ties of ihe subject and the conflicting 
interests whicli had to be reconciled it 
was nut until the I5th of ^November 
1777 tliat they succeeded in coming to 
an agreement on these articles ot con- 
federation. These articles had then to 
be submitted to the State?, and altho* 
most of the states proceeded to ratify 
them immediately, yet Dela'vare did 
not accede to them until 1779 and 
Maryland at first explicitly rejected 
them. She refused to assent to the ar- 
ticles of agreement until there should 
be an additional agreement to appro- 
priate the Western lands as a common 
iund to defray the expenses of the war. 
Tiiis, however, gave such encourage- 
ment to the common enenjy that she 
afterwards abandoned these pretensions 
and in March 1781 the articles of con- 
federation were unanimously ratiiled 
by all the states. 

Previous to the adoption of these 
articles of confederation the authority 
of Congress had been undefined and 
discretionary; such authority as springs 
from the immediate wants and pressing 



124 

necessities of Ihe times, which bint! 
into unity of action, those who are 
borne clown by common oppressions 
and general cah\mities. 

These articles of confederation uere 
not found however to answer the pur- 
poses for which they were adopted. — 
Operating as the derision of the Con- 
gress did upon the States themselves 
instead of upon the people of the States 
tbere were no adequate means of en- 
forcing their penalties. Having no 
power to add a sanction or a penalty to 
iheir laws, they were neither enforced 
nor observed. * Nor were they able to 
decide controversies which might arise 
amonjj; the States, or to protect them 
from internal violence or rebellion. — 
Requisitions upon the States for the 
supplying of the wants of the country 
were entirely disregarded, and by de- 
grees the States, one by one, fell off 
from the confederatiun,neglecting even, 
to send members to Congress. 

^Vith the peace of 1783 came a 
general apathy and relaxation from 
eftbrt.and the confederation soon crum- 
bled into ruin. 

To remedy the evils under which 
the country soon began to languish, it 



125 

was necessary that some further efforts 
shouhl be made. Accordingly a proposi- 
tion was started by Virginia fi)r a con- 
vention to regulate our commerce and 
relations with foreign Nations. There- 
upon, a convention of delegates from 
several of the States met at Annapolis 
in September J786, butfrc^i the small- 
ness of their number, they did not think 
it expedient to proceed to remedy the 
evils which existed, and satisfied them- 
selves with calling a general convention 
v.hich should adopt suitable measures 
for the formation of an efficient govern- 
ment for the control ol the ountry and 
which might obviate the defects exist- 
ing in the old confederation. 

All the States, except Rhode Island, 
acceded to the suggestion, and sent 
delegates who met in gerteial conven- 
tion in Philadelphia, May 1787. 

This convention, composed of the 
most influential, experienced and able 
men of the country.after several months 
deliberation, and a compromise of the 
difficulties which seemed to oppose 
almost insuperable barriers to the ac- 
complishment of their plans, succeeded 
in agreeing upon our present form of 
government, and submitted it to the 



126 

decision of a convention of tlie people 
to be held in each State for their 
ratification or rejection. 

It was also agreed that so soon as nine 
States should agree to it, that the 
Constitution should become the govern- 
ment of the States so adopting. New 
Hampshire was the ninth state to adopt 
it; soon atler which, New York and 
Virginia also agreed to it and upon (he 
4(h March 1789, it went into operation. 
North Carolina and Rhode Island con- 
tinued for some time to withhold their 
assent and it was not till June 1790 
that it received the unanimous assent 
of all the states of the old confederacy. 
Bj this adoption by the people, after 
full deliberation and dispassionate con- 
sideration of i(s merits, of the Cons(i(u. 
tion, the government under wliich we 
now live acquired that vigor and 
stability which was necessary to render 
its action efficient and salutary for the 
benefit ot the people. 

Let us next briefly recur, even at the 
hazard of some repetition, to the intro- 
duction of the laws of England into 
our State, and to the adoption o/ 
the Biil of Rights and the Constitution. 



^^i^^m dS-^'^iiiBSJSciiss'iP 



HARYLAND 

Relative to the Laws, Declara- 
tion of TJights and Constitution, 

For the purpose ot properly under- 
standing the origin of our laws in Ma- 
ryland and their growth out of, their 
connection with, and their dependence 
on the English law, it is necessary to 
take into view the early iiistory of the 
colony, the character of the persons by 
whom, and the circumstances under 
which, the settlements were made, 
and how the government was adminis- 
tered. In England, the lawyers trace 
the connection of their law with the 
fceudal system, the civil law, the can- 
on, or the ecclesiastical law. and the 
old saxon custom?; — but in America, 
the foeudal system never obtained root 
in its strict military vigor, and the laws 
were only so affected by i^, as they had 
grown up in the mother country and 
been imported into the colonies, modi- 
fied by Its influence; and the canou, or 



123 

ecclesiastical law, bad but a slight hold 
if any, in a countrv. which had been 
resorted to purposely as a refuge from 
religious requisitions and persecutions. 
The institution, however, of a Propri- 
etary Governmert and the novel rights 
growing out of such an establishment, 
the dependence of tlie colonies on the 
government of the country fioni which 
Jhey emanated, and the enacting and 
the administering of laws by newly es. 
tablished tribunals, often proceeding 
without prccerent, or previously esiab- 
lished forms, all give the laws of the 
colony a certain peculiarity of form and 
character even before its separation 
from the niothcr country; — but after 
this even^ the revolution itself, the es- 
tablishment of the Federal Government, 
and the connection cf li.e State and the 
Federal tevernments, all involve ques- 
tions cf importanresnd interes' requir- 
ing deep attention and an accurate 
investigation for their solution. To show 
the origin of the law. to trace it back 
to its source, to inc,uire whether it 
sprung from the necessities and the in- 
▼enlicn of the colonists themselves; cr 
whether, it originated in the curamcn 
or statute law cf England; cr whether 



129 

it niay claim the more venerable parerr-' 
tage of the fcEudal system; and also t& 
inqriire the manner in whicli it may 
have been altered or modified by its 
application to the province or the state, 
are all questions requiring investiga- 
tion as serving no less to throw light on 
the dark points of the law as it is at 
present, tlian being calculated to gratify 
the laudable curiosity of the mind of 
the antiquarian. 

The Westminister Review (in an 
article copied into the Museum No. 
1-20, p. 611,) says: <'It was a principle 
with our ancestors, who four.ded the 
ojd colonies, to carry along with them 
such parts only of ihe usages of the mo- 
tiier country, as should be suitable to 
their new circumstances abroad, a prin- 
ciple recently neglected, but capable c-t 
being applied to all the arrangements of 
society, and calculated to promote the 
well being, b) encouraging the individ- 
ual energies of the people. In ecclesi- 
astical affairs, this saved the colonists 
from tithes and ecclesiastical courts; in 
civil affairs generally, it led to the esta- 
blishment of local and popular govern- 
ment, divesled oi those privileges and 
pretentions which had been suffered to 



130 

acrumulate at home; and in the prac'ice 
of the law, it banished from the coloni- 
al courts n srreat part of the technicali- 
ties of Westminister Hall, inasmuch 
as it was at home only that ancient 
offices and exclusive ranks existed, to 
whose interests those technicalities 
were subservient, and by uho?e agency 
they were exercised. 

The last instance regarding the law, 
is familiar to those acquainted wiih the 
progress of our colonial possessions, and 
was put in a strong light by Sir Math- 
ew Hale two centuries a^o, in the fol 
lowing terms; "Concerning the planta- 
tion of Virginia, New England, Ber- 
muda and other islands and continents 
towards the West Indies, and also our 
plantations in Africa and the East 
Indies, the course of their acquisition 
was, that the king issued » commission 
to seize them; thus Virginia, and New 
England were seized, 4 Jac. I; Green- 
land and X\\e northern plantations, 1 
Phil, and Mary pat. 3, and divers oth- 
ers. Presently upon the acquest, the 
English laws are not settled there, or at 
least only temporarily, till a settlement 
is n^.ade; and, therefore we see their ad- 
a>i9tration of justice and law. much dif» 



181 

fering from the Enslisl> law, but the 
people carry with them those English, 
liberties wliich are incident to their per- 
sonsl" — Loi'd Hale's Prerogaiiva Rt- 
gis. 



Origin of the law maki'g power. — 
J^alure of the Chatter; — The Origin oj 
the Declaration of Rio his and its con- 
nection loith and relation to the Constitw^ 
ilon. — The first settlement of Mai viand 
was made on Keist Island, in the year 
1631, hy Clayborne; ar.d in the year 
I83'2, Charles the first granted a patent 
to Lord Baltimore. This charter, after 
defining the limits of the State, declared 
the colony to be entirely separated from 
Virginia and to be immediately sub- 
ject to the crown ot England. Lord 
Baltimore was created absolute Lord 
and Proprietary of the Province, and 
invested with all the riglits which any 
Bishop of Durham in the county Pala* 
tine of Durham, in the kingdom of En- 
gland, had ever enjoyed. He was t> 
hold this of the king of England, "in 
free and common socage hy lea'ty oniy 
for ail services, and aot in capite, < r 



132 

by knights service; yielding 'therefor 
two Indian arrows of those parts, to be 
delivereJ at the said Castle of Wind- 
sor, every year on Tuesday ot Easter 
"Week; and also the fifth part of aH 
gold and silver ore, which should hap- 
pen from time to ti;ne to be found with- 
in the aforesaid limits."' — (Land hold- 
ers A. V2.) The seventh s- ction of the 
same charter grants unto the said baron 
and his heirs, for the good and happy 
government of the said province, free 
full and absolute power, to ordain, 
make and enact laws ot what kind so- 
ever, according to their sonnd discre- 
tion, whether relating to the public state 
nf the said province, or the private util- 
ity of individuals of and with the advice 
and assent and approbation of the free 
men of the same province, or of the 
greater part of them, or of their dele- 
gates or deputies ichum we will, shall be 
called together for the framing of laws, 
when and as often as need shall require, 
bj the aforesaid Baron of Baltimore 
and his heirs, and in the form which 
shall seem best to him or them, and the 
same to be published and duly to exe- 
cute." Thus early do we find provis- 
ion made for representative legislation* 



iSB 

!n the next section, however, this 
proprietary, himself or by hisreprenta- 
tives, is authorized "to make and con* 
stitute fit and wholesome ordinances^to 
be kept and observed for the better 
scoverument of the people inhabiting in 
the province, provided the said ordi- 
nances do not extend to oblige, bind, 
charge,or lake away the right or interest 
of any person or persons of or in mem- 
ber, life, freehold, goods, or ch&ttles*" 

It will thus be seen tliat the proprie- 
tary alone might pass ordinances, though. 
he was to call together the people or 
their deputies, to make laws. 

The charter also gave to the proprie^ 
tary the powers ot a captain genera], 
authorized him to repel invasions, to 
pursue, captivate, and put to death his 
enemie', to exercise martial laws, to 
impose taxes and subsidies on articles 
imported and exported, the product of 
which taxes was given to the proprie- 
tary forever, and it was covenanted on 
the part of the king, that he nor his 
successors should ever impose customs, 
taxes, quotas, or contributions whatso- 
ever upon the people, their property or 
their merchantable commodities ladeu 
within the provinc^. 



134 

It may be remarked of the grant to 
Lord Baltimore, not only that the 
powers authority and pri\iStges, extent! 
beyond all former graiits, but that h 
contained no clause, obliging the pro- 
prietary to submit the laws, which 
might be *^nacted, to t e king for his 
approbation or dissent; nor any reser- 
vation of the right of the crown to in- 
terfere in the government of tlie pro- 
vince. The grant by stipulating that 
ih.e proprietor should enjoy all the 
prerogatives which the Lords Palatine 
t)l Durham ever had enjoyed, com- 
prehended all the original powers of 
the counties Palatine in England, the 
owners of which had in their counties 
ji^7'a regalia as fully &s the king had in 
his palace; they had the power of par- 
doning treasons, murders and felonies, 
of appointing ail judges and justices of 
ihe peace; all writs and indictments 
run in their names, as in other counties, 
in the name of the king, and ail offences 
were said to be done against their, and 
not, as in ether places, against the peace 
of the king.— (L. A. 12.) 

Declaration of Rights and Constitution. 
It was in accordance with this char- 



iS5 

!er that Maryland was governed, with 
the exception of the time when viol- 
ence prevailed and of the short period 
during the Commonwealth, between the 
years 1654 and 1658, (L. A. 20) to the 
time of the American Revolution, when 
the people assumed the power into 
their own hands, exercising it through 
the means ol delegates, who first met in 
convention at Annapolis in the year 
1774. From this time the pcwer of the 
liOrd Propiietary may be considered as 
having been transferred to, and subsist- 
ing in the State Conventions, for the 
41st. Art. in the Bill of Rights declares 
that the subsisting resolves of the 
several conventions held for this colony, 
ought to be in force as laws, unless 
altered by this convention, or the 
legislature of this State. 

There was a convention, which 
assembled in 1776, in Maryland, and 
which instructed the delegates whom 
they had sent to the general convention 
to vote for the Declaration of Independ- 
ence which accordingly was proclaim- 
ed on the 4lh of July of that year. 

And at a convention elected for the 
express purpose and which assembled 
Qu the 14th August 1776, the Declara- 



136 

\jon of Rights for Maryland was assent- 
ed to and passed by the delegates of 
the freemen ol Maryland, and was 
agreed to by them on the 3d of Novem- 
ber 1776, — and the Constituiion,wh\ch 
filled as it were the outlines laid down 
by the declaration of rights for the 
formation of government, was adopted 
in accordance with the Declaration of 
Uighls ol Maryland. These may be 
considered as lying at the foundation 
of the exi.-tence of the present form of 
government, because the people, when 
they first e?eparated frojn and laid off 
their allegiance to Great Britain, as the 
people of an independent State put 
loith these documents as showing the 
rights which thoy claimed, and the 
maxims of government tor which they 
contended and bj which they would 
be regulated. 

A declaration of rights is merely in. 
tended to set forth and insist upon the 
prominent principle^, the unalterable; 
and fundamental laws and maxims, the 
incontestible rights, wiiich arc contend- 
ed for, assumed, and enforced, and 
wliich are supposed to constitute the 
essence of a free government. Theso 
papers appear to be an invention oj 



13T 

modeTi States, and in England we find 
nothing similar. Their Magna Charta 
may be considered as most nearly 
approaching those documents which 
constitute the outlines of our govern- 
ment. (See Kent Com.) 

The Declaration of Rights in Mary- 
land, starts out with the assertion that, 
"the Parliament of Great Britain by a 
declaratory act, having assumed a right 
to make laws to bind the colonies 
in all cases whatsoever, and in pur- 
suance of such claims endeavored by 
force of arms to subjugate the United 
Colonies to an unconditional submission 
to their will and having at length con- 
strained them to declare ^themselves 
Independent States, and to assume 
government under the authority of the 
people; Therefore, we, *he delegates of 
Maryland in free and^fuU convention 
assembled, taking into our most serious 
consideration, the best means of estab- 
lishing a good Constitution in this 
State, for the surer foundation and more 
permanent security thereof, declare^ 
that all government of right originates 
from the people, is founded in compact 
only, and instituted solely for the goo^ 
4/1* the whole " 



1S8 

The third Article declares, "that the 
inhabitants of Maryland are entitled to 
the comraon law of England, and the 
trial by jury according to the course of 
that law, and to the benefit of such of 
the English statutes as existed at the 
time of their first emigration and which 
by experience have been found applica- 
ble to their local and otlier circum- 
stances, and of such others as have 
been since made in England or Great 
Britain, and have been introduced used 
and practised by the courts of law or 
equity; and also, to all acts of Assembly 
in torce on the first of June, 1774, ex- 
cept such as may have expired, or have 
been or may be altered by acts of con- 
vention or this declaration of rights; 
subject, nevertheless, to the revision of 
and amendment or repeal by, the 
legislature of the State; and the in- 
habitants of Maryland are also entitled 
to all property derived to tliera from or 
under the charter granted by his majes- 
ty Charles the first, to Cecilius Calvert, 
Baron of Baltimore." 

This article of the Declaration of 
Rights may be called the conneciino; 
linli which binds the l&ws of Maryland 
to their original sources in the mother 



iS9 

^-<yuTjtrj and hoUls them connected to 
gether; — and as prior to this article 
there were two bodies, to wit; the Eng- 
lish Parliament, and the Assembly of 
Maryland together with the Proprie- 
tart," which might pass faus affecting 
the colony, so after the passage of this 
bill, the General Assembly of the State 
alone could legislate for it, until the 
formation of the present General Gov- 
ernment m year 17S9, when the State 
surrendered up to the United iStates 
certain of its sovereign powers, foi the 
more effectual promotion of the common 
weal. 

The Court of Appeals of Maryland 
has incid<?ntally decided the Declara- 
tion of Rights to be a part of the Con* 
«titution. (Sec. 1st. Gdl and Johnson 
473 &c). 

It will be perceived that the Declara- 
tion of Rights of Maryland was adopted 
in August, about a month subsequently 
to the Declaration of Independence by 
the Congress of the United States, and 
it was confirmed by the people of 
Maryland in Kovembei following &Cc 

Lei us now briefly recapitulate in 
their chronological connection, some of 
tisane leadiDg facts: We find that I a 



140 

the year 1632 the charter of Maryland 
vvas granted empowering the Proprie- 
tary by and with the advice of the 
deleg;ates or deputies ot the freemen of 
the State to pass /au'Sj— or, empower- 
trig the Proprietary alcne to pass or- 
dinances, which do not affect the in-- 
terests of any person or persons of or in 
meraberj life, freehood, goods, or chat- 
ties. It w? • at one time a much moot- 
ed point how far the laws of England 
extended (o the province &c. as may 
be seen. Kilty's R. S. pp; 176 and Mc* 
Mahon's Maryland page 112 &c. It 
seems from 3rd Art. of Declaration of 
Rights that while power wai liius given 
to legislate that not o: !y such statutes 
as were in force in England at the time 
of emigration but also such others as 
Were pai^sed subsequently and found 
applicable t the province or "had bee a 
introduced used and practised in tiiis 
State" were also iniroduced. And ihus^ 
it continued dow:n ^o the year 1776, 
when the declaration of lights cut off 
the power of legislating fur the pruvinee 
from the Proprietary and from the Eng-^ 
Hsh Parliament, and vested tt la the 
General Assembly of the Stale, exclu- 
^'^yely, until the year 17S9, wh^n th.^ 



i4t 

United States government went info 
operation, and certain powers of legis- 
lation enumerated in the United States 
constitution were exclusively vested in 
St. And from that to the present time 
the government lias thus continued. 

From the above it will be seen that 
only such statutes of England as had 
been in force prior to the Declaration 
of Rights, (1776) and as were found 
applicable to the circumstances and 
condition of the province, were to be 
adopted as being in force in this State. 
Of course it becomes a matter of moment 
at once, to determine what statutes 
were considered as applicable and 
which were not so. This of course 
presents a question to be determined by 
the courts of our State, whenever it 
may arise. 

the principal authority however in 
reference to the applicability or In- 
applicability of the statutes of England 
are now to be found in * 'Kilty's Report 
of Statutes.'' 

This was a work prepared by William 
Kilty Esq. Chancellor of Maryland, in 
accordance with a resolution of the 
legislature of Maryland in the year 
3800, and published in the year 1810 



142 

5tnd comprised in three part?, the firsi 
containing the titles of such statutes as 
had not extended ^o the Province; the 
second of those which had extended; 
but were not proper to be incorporated, 
and the lliird, of those wliich had ex- 
tended and IV ere proper lobe ineorpora* 
ted. 

In reference to tiiis book, ihe Court 
of Appeals of Md. (5 H. and J. 403.) 
observes "This view of the third sec- 
tion of the Bill of Rights raises the 
question, wlwch-ot the statutes existing 
at the time of the first emigration, had 
by experience been found app]ic*fbie? 
The only evidence to be found on <' 
subject is furnished by Kilty's Repc 
©f Statutes, in which the 43 Eliz. is 
classed among these which are said 
not to have been found applicable. — 
That book was -compiled, p iufed, and 
distrib»)ted under the sanction of the 
State, for ihe use of its officeis, and is a 
safe guide in exploiing an otherioise very 
dubious path J" 

So that it seems that if Kilty's Repoit 
of statutes be not absolute and conclu- 
sive evidence, yet that it is prima facie 
evidence as to the adoption of such 
.^tdtutes a? are set forth in it as being 



143 

applicable, and as such it has been re- 
garded by the courts and the public. — 
The author of the work states that the 
Report had been grounded on a careful 
perusal and consideration of the statutes 
at laro;e, and on an exavnination as far 
as it was practicable of the recor»ls of 
the former provincial courf-, and the 
I^egislative and Executive proceedings 
of the government before the revolution. 
With respect, he says, to the criminal 
statutes (which before the passing of 
the Penitcnti.iry Law of 1909, were 
considered of the most importance,) the 
recor'^.s have afforded tl'.e most conclu- 
-■ vi^ evidence as to the usage and prac- 
:>'/e under them; but in civil case?, it 
wTas different, and the record bo()ks,the 
nature of the subjects and the law au- 
thorities thereon, and the usage and 
practice of the Provini^e, had to be re- 
ferred to in proof of t-he extension of 
many of the statutes, (K. R. S.) 

It seems, says the same work, that 
the question as to the application and 
extension of the English statutes, was 
taken up at the first session of assembly 
of which we have any record, and con- 
tinued in various ways to be agitated to 
a period so late as the year 1771.— 



144 

The views of the proprietors and then 
adherents, tended to discourage the 
extension of those statutes, in order 
that their power of assenting to laws 
might become more important, while 
on the other hand the people of the 
province were unwilling that the stat- 
utes should be particularly declared as 
applicable, and were desirous ol leaving 
it entirely to the courts to determine 
whether the adoption of the statutes 
would be in accordance with the good 
of the country and the wants of the 
people. 

There are then Ihree distinct modes 
by which the English statutes may 
ha\e been in force in the Province, 1st. 
By the express declaration of the par- 
liament; Sid. By declarations contain- 
ed in the Provincial acts of assembly: 
3d. By having been introduced and 
practiced under by the courts of law 
and equity; which is the most import- 
ant in judging ol those that are to be 
retained under the provisions in the 
declaration ot rights. Many statutes 
relating to rights and rules of property 
have been tacitly acquiesced in, and 
many have been used and prec- 
ticed under, without any express de- 



145 

clsion of the courts. See K, R. S. Intro. 
It may also be remarked that the acts 
cf the Legislature have in many cases, 
by operating on the same subject,super- 
seded the English statutes, sometimes 
partially, sometimes wholly. 

Having said thus much in relation 
to the statute law, which is sometimes 
called the "lex scripta," let us merely 
advert for a moment to what is usually 
known by the name of the common 
law, or ''lexnon scripta," because such 
law originates not from written enact? 
ments of the Parliament or Legislature 
but from the decision of the judges upon 
such questions as may have been pre- 
sented to them in the numberless causes 
of litigation which arise in the diver- 
sified intercourse of human society, and 
which the statutes hare not provided for, 
but left to the judgment and the exer." 
cise of sound discretion in the courts 
of law. It seems to be but reasonable 
that when the judges once decide a case 
that in subsequent cases which may 
arise of a similar character, they should 
preserve a uniformity of decision and 
an adherence to established principles. 
But as there may exist an endlesi 
10 



146 

diversity in the circumstances and 
particulars of human transactions, so 
there is continual occasion for the ex- 
ercise of the judgement of the courts, 
not only properly to adjudicate every 
case which may come before them ac-* 
cording to its own intrinsic merits, but 
also to preserve an uniformity in their 
decisions and a consistency with princi- 
ples, which may have been before laid 
down by them, as governing them in 
all their decisions. These decisions 
being collecled together in print, form 
the books of Reports, which constitute 
4he common law,' and which are con- 
sidered as the perfection of human 
reason and the highest improvement of 
the human judgment. In cases of 
litigation coming before the courts, it is 
usual to appeal to these books to ascer- 
taui what have the been decisions of the 
same court, or of other courts,in similar 
cases, or in analogous cases, which may 
have been presented to them, and thus 
to decide new cases in conformity with' 
such prior decisions. It is the collec- 
tion and arrangement of these decisions 
which constitute the great body of most 
of the law Libraries, and which far 
surpasses in magnitude and extent the 



147 

]ex scripta or statute law, and it is this 
too which occupies principally the hours 
of devotion of th^ student, and con- 
stitute those precedents which com- 
mand and govern the decision of the 
judges. 

It is evident from observations al- 
ready made, that the common law of 
England was not excluded from adop- 
tion by the Province of Maryland, and 
that it has always been considered one 
of the proudest inheritances of the 
country. Yet in Fer.nsylvania an act 
was at one time passed forbidding the 
quoting of any book ot the English 
common law.. 

The decisions at the English common 
law, may then also be considered as of 
binding authority, as precedents, down 
to the time of the declaration of rights, 
subsequently to which time, the Eng- 
lish precedents are quoted in the Mary- 
land courts not as absolutely binding, 
but merely as of weight and authority 
and as commanding the respect and 
highest attention from our courts, (5 
Har. & J. 35S.) 



Note — Books: There has never 
been m the courts of Mar^'land any 
legally appointed or established Re- 
porter, but the reports of the arguments 
of the cases, and the judgments of the 
court have been made by private persons 
whose undertakings the State encour- 
ages by subscribing for a number of 
copies, so as to remunerate them for 
their expense and trouble. The first 
Reports in Maryland were of the cases 
in the General Court of the State, the 
old Court of Appeals &c. and extended 
trom the year 1658 to the Revolution. 
They were then continued by Harris 
and Johnson, from 1800 to 1826, after 
which they were continued, by Harris 
and Gill, and subsequently by Gill and 
Johnson. 

This collection of the adjudications 
of the Court of Appeals of Maryland, 
is a work calculated to do credit not 
only to the eminent counsel and judges, 
but to elevate the character of the State 
itself in the eyes of the world, for the 
profound learning, the d.eep research, 
the accurate discrimination, perspicuous 
statement of principles, and the correct 
deductions and inferences, which ar§ 



l4S 

eoDtained in them. The clearness an^ 
the distinctness with which the litigated 
points have been settled and established, 
will go far to settle on a firm basis,many 
of the vexed questions, which have 
been the source of contention and con- 
troversy. It is the foundation of a 
fabric worthy of an infant State, and 
which will continue to reflect credit 
upon her character. 

In addition to this we may add the 
Chancery Reports by Chancellor Bland, 
containing cases adjudicated in the 
Chancery Court. 

"While we are upon the subject of 
the law books of Maryland^ we would 
also take this occasion to mention some 
others of the law books which hare 
been published from time to time in 
relation to Md. Laws, &c. as enabling 
some who have not the books before 
them, to form a more accurate judgment 
of them. 

The statute laws of Maryland, were 
in the early years of the Province 
merely recorded in the public offices. 

Subsequently to this, a book of the 
acts p<issed at each session was publish- 
ed at the close of each session, and in 
the year 1765 Thomas Bacon, the 



150 

Rector of All Saints Parish in Freder- 
ick county and Domestic Chaplain in 
^laryland to the Right Honorable 
Frederick Lord Baltimore, published 
the laws of Maryland at large, then for 
the first time collected in one complete 
body^ and also prefixe 1 to it a tran«-- 
lation of the charter. This edition of 
the statutes, in folio, gives a preface, 
sb.owing the irr.perfect compilations 
uhich had preceded it, and setting 
forth the occasions of the mutilation 
of the State records. The publication 
of this volume was much aided by the 
liberal subscriptions of many of the 
uealthy and patiiotic citizens of the 
State, who gave from 50 to 100 iS to- 
wards bringing it out. 

Harrison's laws carried Ba-con on to 
17S5. 

In the year 1797 there was an edition 
of laws published by Parks in Phila- 
delphia. 

Bacon's edition of the laws was 
followed, and indeed superseded, by 
two large quarto volumes of the Laws 
of Maryland, published by Mr. Kilty, 
in the year 1799, in pursuance of a 
resolution of the General Assembly of 
^JaryUnd, of the previous year, direct- 



151 

iug him to include in his edition all iLe 
public acts then in force, from the year 
1692. Of thie edition, only ^00 copies 
were directed to be printed, and sueh 
is now the slender supply upon which 
the State has to depend, for important 
information, as to the laws, down to 
the year 1799. 

The next compilation of laws of the 
State, was also in conformity to a resolu- 
tion of the Legislature of the State^ 
passed in the year 1817, and in con- 
formity to which Messrs. Harris, Wat- 
kins and Kilty, (the son ot (he former) 
compiled and published in 5 volumes, 
commencing where Kilt} left otT, ard 
calling it the 3d vol. and which brought 
the laws up to the year IS 18, with 
an index to that time; and the last 
volume containing a compilation of the 
chancery laws of the State. Since that 
time to the present the laws have been 
only published as annual acts of the 
General Assembly, in pamphlet form, 
although an Index has been published 
extending from the year 1818 to 1820, 
and another from that period to L^^Sl, 
and another from that period to 1837. 
Auxiliary as it may be considerecij to 
these lawSj there was published by 



i5i 

Virgil ^laxcy E^^q. an edition of the 
laws of Maryland, in 3 volumes, con- 
taining the public acts alone, trom the 
year 159-2 to ISll. 

From the number of acts which hare 
in the courfe of so many years been 
passed in the State^ and the Space to 
which they have extended^ and the 
magnitude to which thej have swelled, 
it may well be supposed that no little 
confusion prevails over them; and to 
remedy this, and to reduce and simplify 

them, the Legislature in the year 

directed the compilation of a classifica- 
tion of the statutes. This however was 
not effected. 

In the year 1840, the Hon. Jadi^e 
Clement Dorsey, published a compila- 
tion of the Laws of Maryland, in 3 
vols., containing the General Laws of 
the State, now in force, and in the 
latter part of the woik, allthe local 
laws Nvhich were applicable to each 
county, under the head of the different 
counties. The work has annotations 
on the laws, shewing the effect S^'c. of 
subsequent laws, and also has a copious 
index, calculated to render it useful, so 
far as it goes, as a digest of the laws of 
the State. The publication of this 



153 

\Vork was greatly facilitated by tbe 
patronage extended to it by the Leds- 
lature of 1838-39. 

We would also cursorily mention as 
among the fundamental law books of 
Maryland, HarrisjEntries, in 2 volumes, 
containing the most approved preced- 
ents in pleading &c. This work has 
passed to a second edition by Hugh D. 
Evans in the year 1839. 

Among other laws and historical 
books published in reference to Maiy- 
)and, we might recount llerty's Digest, 
Eli Lavette's Dep Com. Guide,Colvin's, 
Hall's, Curaming's, and Latrobe's Jus- 
tices; M. Henry on Ejectment, Land« 
holders' Assistant, Insolvent Laws 
Digest, JNIcMahon's, Bozman's and 
Griffith's histories, &.c. 

There have also been published the 
following useful works which are too 
much referred to, ti require any further 
notice than their mere mention: — Alex* 
anders' Chancery ,Evans' Practice, Ray- 
mond's Chancery Reports, Dorsey's 
Testamentary Law,Hinckly on attach- 
ments, and others. 



CHAPTER IL 
MARYLAND. 



Right of Si'ffrage^EUgibUiiy to Of. 
fice — Declaration of Eeligious Be- 
lief— Oaihs cfOjfice^&ic. 
We propose now to make a few re- 
marks en the Right of Suffrage and its 
variations in our State; what constitutes 
Eligibility to various of the offices; the 
Declaration of Religious Belief requir- 
ed; and tlie Oaths of Office which are 
to be taken. 5cc. 

Right of Suffrage; — Summary of 
THE Chaxgfs of — In the earlv time of 
the colonv the right of franchise was 
cot much estimated, but by degrees 
came to be more thought of. In 16Si 
by the ordinance of the Proprietary il 
was restricted to freeholders or to 
persons having personal estate of 40 ^ 



155 

which restrictions were confirmed bj 
the law in 169-2, and continued bj 
successive acts (1704 ch 35; 1708 ch 5; 
1715 ch 4'2; 1716 ch 11) until the 
Revolution. The 2nd article of Dec. 
Rights fixed mueh the same qualifica- 
tions. In 1798 ch 115, it was to be 
regulale<i by lew. In ISOl ch 90 
white persons alone could vote, — m 
1809 ch S3 after a residence of 12 
months in the State and 6 in the county. 

TPIF. niGIIT OF SUFFRAGE. 

History — Pr''y Qualification — Under 
the Proprietary Government the 7th 
see, of the charter provided that laws 
should be passed with the advice, assent 
and approbation of the freemen of the 
Province or ot their delegates or depu- 
ties. Let us enquire who had the right 
m those days of voting for delegates— 
The preamble of the act of 1716 ch II 
is in these words: ''For as much as the 
cnoicest and only foundation and sup- 
port of any kingdom, st^fte or common- 
wealth, is the providing, establishing 
and enacting good and wholesome laws 
for the good rule and governmerA 
thereof, and also upon any necessary 
and emergent occasion, to raise and 
borrow znonev for the charge of said 



156 

government and the defence thereof 
neither of which according to the con- 
stitution of this province can be made, 
ordained, established or raised, but by 
and with the consent of the freemen of 
this province, by their several delegates 
and representatives, by those fieely 
nominated, chosen and elected to serve 
for their several cities and counties in 
the general assembly; and for as much 
as the safest and best rule for this pro- 
vince to follow, in electing such dele« 
gates and representatives, is the pre- 
cedents o-f the proceedings in pariia^ 
ments in Great Britain, as near as the 
constitution of this province will admit 
the Governor in the upper and lower 
houses of this general assembly, do 
humbly pray that it may be enacted &.g.'^ 
The act then goes on to regulate the 
mode of election and authorises the 
sheriff to empower three justices, one 
of whom to be of the quorum, with the 
clerk of the county court, to hold an 
election, giving notice to all resident 
freemen having a freehold of forty a- 
cres in the county, a»d having a visi- 
ble estate at 40 pounds sterling at the 
least, to elect &c.; and persons who did 
not vot-e were (sec 6) subject to a fine 



157 

Hjf 100 lbs. of tobacco; and the expenses 
of the persons elected were to be de- 
frayed out of the public levy of the pro- 
vince (sec 8). 

Thus it continued down to the time 
cf the Declaration of Rights and the 
Constitution. The Dec. of Rhts. (art 
5) declared, that the right in the peo- 
pie to participate in the Legislature is 
the best security of liberty and the 
foundation of all free government; for 
this purpose ejections ought to be free 
and frequent, and every man having 
property in, a common interest with, 
and an attachment to the community, 
ought to have a right of suffrage. 

In pursuance with this article of the 
declaration of rights, the iind art. of 
the Constitution regulated the right of 
voting, prescribing that persons who 
had property to the value of ^£30 and 
had resided in the county one whole 
year next preceding the election,should 
have the right of suffrage; the same ar- 
ticle also prescribed the times, places 
and manner of voting, which was viva 
voce, and not by ballot. In 1798 (ch 
115 conf. 1799 ch 48) the constitution 
was amended, and every part of the 
se-coBd; third, fifth, fourteenth and for* 



15^ 

ty second sections which relate to the 
judges, place, time and manner of hold- 
ing the several elections for delegate?, 
electors of the Senate, and shenflfof the 
several counties was annulled and it 
was provided that the same hereafter 
be regulated by law. In 1801 (ch 90 
conf 1602 ch 20) the right of voting w^s 
given to every free white male citizen 
and no other, above 21, who hath resi- 
ded 12 months within the county, and 
he shall vote by ballot, for delegates to 
the general assembly, electors of the 
senate and sheriiV'. 

This it will be perceived removed all 
property qualifications but did not pro- 
vide for persons voting for United 
States officers; nor did it remove the 
necessity ol a property qualification 
Jrom office holders; consequently Nov. 
1809 ch 83 (conf 1810 ch 33) was 
passed and gave to every free wldte 
male citizen above 21, and to no other, 
leaving resided 12 mouths in the State 
and 6 months in the county &c., next 
preceeding the election at which he 
ofters to vote, the right of suftVage; and 
ke shall vote, by ballot, in the election 
of such county or city, or either of them, 
for electors of the president and vies 



159 

president ot the United States, for re- 
presentatives of this state in the Con- 
gress of the U. S., for delegates to the 
General Assembly of the State, electors 
of the Senate and sherifts; and this 
amendment to the cons Itution now re- 
gulates the right of suffrage. 

And as regards property qualifica- 
tions in offioe holders the act of 1S09 
ch 198 (conf 1810 ch IS) provided that 
all such parts of the constitution and 
form of government as require a proper- 
ty qualification in persons appointed to 
or holding offices of profit or trust m 
this state, and in persons elected mem- 
bers of the Legislature or electors of 
the Senate, shall be, and the same are 
hereby repealed and abolished. 

From these sections it vvill be seen, 
that the voting viva voce; that the re- 
quisition of a property qualification in 
voters; and the same in office holders; 
have all been changed since the adop- 
tion of the Constitution and that the 
regulation of the judges,place, time and 
manner of regulating elections have 
been taken from the Constitution to be 
regulated by law. 

According to the Declaration of Rights 
and the Constitution., it will be se«fi 



160 

that free blacks had the right ol voting, 
&c., and this franchise they continued 
to exercise for some time. But the Act 
of November 1796, ch. 67, sec, 5, took 
away from any slave mimumitted since 
the passing of the act of April, 1783. 
ch 23, which was an act, (subsequently 
repealed,) to prohibit the bringing of 
slaves into this State, and also from 
slaves who should hereafter be manu^ 
mitted according to this act, the priv- 
ilege of voting at elections, or of being 
elected or appointed to any of office pro 
tit or trust or to give evidence against 
any white person or for any slave pe- 
titioning for freedom. 

And again, by the amendment of the 
Constitution, alluded to above, 1801, 
(ch 99, conPd. 1802, ch 20) the right 
of voting was given to every free white 
male citizen, and no other. This, of 
course, removed^from them all privir 
lege ot voting. ~ 

t The Judges, time, place and manner 
of holding elections was therefore reg- 
ulated hereafter by law,which time ^nd, 
space do not allow us, at present to e^f 
^inine. 



WHAT CONSTITUTES ELIGIBILITY TO 
CERTAIN OFFICES. 

^s to the Governor, — Formerly,under 
the old Constitution, no person, unless 
above twenty five years of age, and a 
resident oi' this State above five years 
next preceding the election, could be 
eligible as Governor (Constitution, art 
30;) and no person having been Gov-* 
ernor for three successive years was 
eligible to that office until the expiration 
of four years after he shall have been out 
ofihat ofnce (Con. art .31;) nor was the 
Governor capable of holding any office 
of profit during the time for which he 
shall be elected (June 1809, ch 16, con 
Nov 1809. ch 11.) Under the amend- 
ed Constitution the Governor must be 
thirty years of age and is not eligible at 
the succeeding term. He must also 
have been at least tViree whole years 
before a resident of his gubernatorial 
district (1836: ch 197 sec 20.) 

Member of the Council or Senate. — 
Formerly no person could be elisjible 
as a member of the Council (con. art 2) 
or of the Senate (art 15) who had not 
arrived at the age of twenty-five years, 
aod resided in the ^tate for three vears 



162 

next precedincr the election. But now 
the qualifications necessary in a Sen- 
ator are the same as those required in 
a Delegate to the General Assembly, 
wit'i the additionnl qualification, ^h:it he 
shall be above the age of tv^.ity-five 
years and shall liave resided at least 
three years next precedin^^ his election, 
in the county or city in or for which he 
shairbe chosen (1636, sec 5 ch 197). 

Delegates. — No person shall be eligible 
as a Delegate to the General Assembly 
who has not arrived at the age of twenty 
one yearsj^ and resided in the county 
or city which he is to represen', for 
twelve months next preceding the elec- 
tion (con. art 2.) 

The residence required for delegates 
irom Baltimore and A. Arundel coun- 
ties shall be exclusive of the city of 
Baltimore and Annapolis (1809, chap 
198, conf 1610 ch 18.) But this was 
repeale.l by sec. 20 of 1836, ch 197. 

Electors of the Senate. — Formerly 
the Electors of tiie Senate required the 
same qualification as the county dele- 
gates (con. art 14.) But now the 
Senate is elected directly by the people. 

JYot to receive the profits of two ojfi- 
ces — or hold offices undtr the L States', 



168 

Kbsidence — Formerly, no person hold- 
ing a plac<3 of profit, or receiviiif^ any 
pa't of the profits thereof, or receivit^g 
the profits or any part of the profits 
arising on any agency, for the supply 
of clothing or provisions hv the Army 
or Navy, or holding any office under 
the United States or any of them, or a 
minister or preachei of the Gospel, of 
any denomination — or, any person em- 
ployed in the regular land service, or 
marine of this State, or the United 
StateSjWould liave a seat in the General 
Assembly, or the Council of this State. 
But the 7th section of 1839, ch 197,re> 
pealed so much of the 37th article ot 
the Constitution as provides that no 
Senator or Delegate to the General As- 
sembly, if be shall qualify as such, 
shall bold or execute any office of profit 
during the time for which he shall be 
elected. Though the bib section still 
provides that no Senator or Delegate, 
during tbe time for which he was elec- 
ted, be appointed to any civil office, 
whicb shall have been created or the 
emoluments of whicb shall have been 
increased during such-time. 

No member of Congress or peison 
holding an office of trust or profit UR' 



!64 

der the United States^ shall be capable 
of havingf a seat in the General Assem- 
bly, or bein^ an elector of the Senate, 
or holding any office of trust or profit 
"juder this State; and if any member of 
the General Assembly, elector of the 
senate or person holding an office of 
trust or profit under this state shall take 
his seat in congress, or accept of an 
office of trust or profit under the United 
States, or being elected to Congress or 
appointed to any office of trust or profit 
iinder the United States, not make his 
resignation ot his seat in Congress, or 
of his office as the case may be, within 
thirty'days after notice ot his election 
or appointment to office as aforesaid. 
bis seat in the Legislature of this State, 
or as an elector of the Senate, or of his 
office held under this State as aforesaid 
shall be void (1791 ch 80 conf 1792 
ch22).^ 

All civil officers for the several coun- 
ties ot this State, shall have been resi- 
dents of the county for which they shall 
be appointed, six months next before 
their appointment, and shall continue 
residents of the county while the) re- 
main in office. (Art 46). 

No member of the General Assem- 



165 

bly or Council if he shall qualify, shall 
hold any office ot profit diirino; the time 
for which he shall be eiectfd (this is 
repealed by 1836 ch 197 sec 7); and if 
any member of the Geiierai Assembly 
or Conncil, after (jualifyi;ig, and du- 
ring the time for which he shall act as 
such, or if any Governor, Cii:inceIlor, 
judge, register of wills, register of the 
land office, commissioner of the loan 
office, re<2;ister of the Chancery Court, 
or any clerk of the comiimn law courts; 
treasury, naval officer, surveyor or au- 
ditor of the public accounts, or sheriff, 
while acting in the office which hft 
holds, ^shall receive directly or indirect- 
ly or at any time, the prnfifs or any 
part of the profits of any office held by 
any other person, his election, appoint- 
nientand commission, on conviction in 
a court of law, by the oath of tvo 
credible witnesses, shall he void, and 
he shall suffer the punishment for wil- 
ful and corrupt perjury or ' e banished 
from the state forever or disqualified 
forever from holding any office or place 
of trust or profit as the court may ad- 
judge (cons, arts 37,39,53) — a justice 
of the peace may however be eligible 
us a Senator, delegate or member of 



166 

the council, and may continue to act as 
a justice of the Peace (con. art 44). 

It is thought however that the pen* 
alties in tlicse articles may be repealeil 
partly hy a repeal of the 38th Article 
of the constituiion respecting oaths and 
by the act regulating oaths of office. 

Formerly it required a property qual- 
ification in Maryland not only to ena- 
ble a person to hold office but also to 
vote; it will be seen above that the ne- 
cessity of a property qualification in the 
voter was repealed by the amendment 
of the constitution in 1801 (ch 90^ 
conf. 1802 ch 20), and in the office 
holder by Nov. J809 (ch 198; conf 
181.0 ch 18). Thus have the property 
qualifications gradually been laid aside 
and all the citizens of the State, whether 
rich or poor, put upon the same footing. 



DECLARATION OF RELIGIOUS BELIEF 

In regard to the to'eralion of all 
religious creeds iiuder tlie Colonial 
Government we have spoken above. — 

In al'v'!ing to the subject of rtiigious 
tolcritt>> I ill Maryland, and the early 
spirit of hbeiality witli which our laus 
were characterised, and particularly to 
the charter ntiHiud to Cecilius, the son 
and !i ii' of George Calvert, on the 20th 
June 163-2, a pubh'c speaker lately le- 
niarktd as follows: — 

**The mild, liberal, and mor.'J spirit 
of the father was characti^isticaliy im- 
pressed upon the charter thus granted 
to the son: wfiich strongly corroborates 
the oiiiriion, that he himself was its 
autlior. Although, very naturally, im- 
bued to a considerable extent, with the 
arist.icratic and loyal spirit of an Eng- 
lish subject, siiil, he made ample pro- 
vision for ihe rights and liberties of the 
colonists. Altl>ough, too, he had felt 
the sting of religious intolerance, and 
had been numbered araorgst the ''fro- 
scribed," on his conversion to the faith 
o( the Catholic religion, itill, he insured 



168 

to all christian men the most pei feci 
exercise of the rights of conscience. — 
Nor was it a mtre parchment guarantee. 
Never, from the first settlement of 
Maryland, down to the perrod when 
her^Proprietary government w^as sus- 
pended, could she blush (or the com- 
mission of one act of authorizerl intoler- 
ance against any denomination of 
christians. To be sure, Christianity 
was made ihe law of the land; and was, 
in some measure, the boundary -line of 
political franchise. The unhappy cliild 
of the Synagogue was still doomed to 
bear the marH of an outcast, and was 
unjustly debarred the privileges of a 
freeman. Even so; Calvert, and his 
colonists after him, made giant strides 
in advance of the age. Maryland 
established the principle, and, above 
all, ihe practice of christian toleration, 
in the new hemisphere, and laid the 
ground-woik for the complete super- 
structure, which was, afterwards, rear- 
ed by the hands of Jefferson, and his 
illustrious co-laborers in the cause of 
truth. She was the first to give "re- 
ligious liberty a home, its only home in 
the wide world:*'* where "ihe disfran^ 
* Bancroll's Hist. U. S , vol I, p. 247. 



169 

chised/riends of pi'elacy from Massa» 
chusetls, and the Puritans from Virginia 
were ivelcome to equal liberty of coii- 
science and political rights,^'} Such is 
a sttiuple, only, of the honoral)le and 
impartial testimony of Bancroft; who 
is more than sustained by the eloquent 
historian of Maryland. I say it not in 
tiiuinph. It is a recorded truth. In- 
deed the. contrast is too mournful for tri- 
umph' It was, truly, most lamentable, 
to see men who had fled from the old 
world, to secure a peaceful enjoyment 
of civil and religious freedom, them- 
selves, and their children after them, 
persecuting^ their fellow^men for a 
difference in creed! Maryland did not, 
and could not rejoice in the contrast. — 
She only endeavored to teach a beHer 
lesson, and to exemplify her teaching 
by her practice " 

It was indeed honorable to the first 
Proprietary of Maryland, that ashy the 
charter he, "had taken from himself 
and his successors, all arbitrary power, 
by establishing the legislative franchise 
of the people; so he took from them 
the means of being intolerant in religion 
by securing to all present and future 
tibid, p. 257. Ilbid, p. 242. 



170 

liege people of the English king, with* 
out distinction of sect or party, free 
leave to transport themselves and their 
families to Maryland." (Banc. vol. 
Ipp243). 

This toleration of all religious sects 
in Maryland, without persecution, is 
especially honora'ule to the founders of 
the state and cannot but be creditable 
to them, when in several of the other 
colonies great bigoiry prevailed. This 
liberality of sentiment mav be attribu- 
ted to two cause?; first, the enliglitened 
views and the sagacity of the Proprie- 
tors-; and secondly, to the peculiar 
circumstances, under which the colony 
was settled. It is well known to the 
reader of history that at the time that 
the charter of Maryland was granted 
the feelings of intolerance towards the 
Catholics in the mother country, ran 
hig[h,and indeed the violent pursecution 
of them in consequence of their re- 
ligious opinions induced them to seek 
an asylum in a foreign land. It is not 
then to be supposed that, at the very 
sametime that they were asking and in- 
deed enjoying for themselves toleration 
of their own religious opinions from the 
mother country, that they would attempt 



171 

to persecute those who differed from 
them in the colony, and wlio would have 
of course, resorted to the higher tribunal 
for an appeal, if their rights had been 
infringed upon. 'J'he proprietaries of 
Marylard tlierefore, rejoicing in the 
free and uninterrupted exercise of 
their own religio js sentiments, felt no 
disposition to provoke attacks upon 
themselves, by crusading against the 
rights of others. They were themselves 
tolerated not only in the possession of 
their religious rights, but also in the 
enjoyment of important political powers 
granted to them by Protestant Sover» 
t?igns in a nation where a permanent 
religion was established by law. — 
Happy had it been for the reputation 
of our state, if this toleration not only 
leiigioiis, but also politicaJ, had been 
allowed to continue. But it was not. 
Even in the province of Maryland, first 
settled by Catholics, and established, as 
it were, as an asylum for them, from 
religious persecution in the old coun- 
tries, in a short time the Protestants, 
doubtless looking for their aid and 
succor to their more lofty ally accross 
the waters, became the more powerful, 
znd obtained the ascendencj. So that, 



il2 

in a short time, so far from visiting 
persecution on others, even, if he had 
been so disposer' the Proprietary !^ was 
compelled to look to his own safety.^- 
We quote from the nervous language 
of the same writer again, when he states: 
the fact;— 

''Such was Maryland, in the first 
ppoch of her career. But, alas! ihe 
hour of her prevarication was approach- 
ing! Turbulent and unscrupulous men 
were meditating 'iideous ruin. Civil 
comn ion lifted its viper-head from 
amidst the flowers of peace. Tiie rep- 
tile of religious bigotry, fresh from the 
den of English persecution, envenomed 
the public mindo Demagogues, court- 
ly sycophants, and saintly hypocrites 
all combined, in one unholy effort, to 
feed the cancerous disease, which 
corroded th.e loveliest feature of human 
liberty. Maryland forgot her ancient 
glory! What cared intriguing men for 
the memory of olden times? What 
cared :hey for the rcmembi-ance of Cal- 
vert's liberality, and the practical 
tolerance of the Pilgrims? Not a jot. 
The honor and the happiness of Mary- 
land were but as a grain of dust in the 
scale, when wei",hed with Iheir s^lfisU 



173 

purposes. I speak it plainly, fellow- 
titizens, for it is true; and it is time 
that the present ojenerationshould know 
it, and think well on it: for if there be 
one lesson more dear to Maryland than 
another, it is the one taught by the 
history of this period. And, I would 
rather never breathe again, than be 
guilty of the cowardly concealment of 
a single unpalatable truth. I repeat 
j,t, Maryland forgot her ancient 
glory! Hence the odious appeals to 
popular passion; hence the utter con- 
tempt tor the religious rights of man; 
hence the Catholic was disfranchised in 
the very colony, which had been 
settled by the toil of his forefathers! — 
As there is a Heaven above me, I speak 
it not in bitterness, but in deep, deep 
sorrow. It is the one blot upon the 
honor of Maryland," 

And again, he alludes to the superior 
power of the Protestants in the colony 
from which it will be seen that those 
of the Protestant denomination who 
were tolerated in the full and entire 
exercise of all their religious views in 
the Colony, were in fact the stronger 
party,and therefore that the establishers 
of the colony would but consult their 



174 

owu interests and the peculiar circum- 
stances ill which they themselves were 
placed, by extending the rights to the 
tree exercise of tlieir religious opinions 
to all ctiier sects of the Chrisliaa de- 
nomination* 

^'Fanatical men had poisoned the 
public nnnd;a groundless revolution had 
hurled tiie Proprietary from his ancient 
dominion; and, at -the express solicita- 
tion of the rebellious ''Associators," 
Maryland was placed in the huiniliat- 
ius5 attitude of a royal province. King 
William assumed the Executive power: 
and, on the 9th of April, 1692, Sir 
Lionel Copley, by royal appointment, 
dissolved the revolutionary convention, 
and undertook the government of the 
province. The first act of the new 
Assembly was "the act of recognition 
of William and Mary;" by the second, 
*''the Church of England was formally 
established." "Thus, (continues McMa- 
hon.) was intioduced, for the first time 
in Maryland,a church estallishmeut sus- 
tained by law, and fed by general tax- 
ation." t The Catholic," tiie Puritan, 
the Quaker, and every other Non-con- 
formist, was taxed to support a form of 
worship, which they repudiated. Un- 



175 

der the old system, every man had paid 
his own preacher. Upon the improved 
pLm, the whole people now paid the 
ministers of the dominant party. It is 
hardly necessary for me, fellow-citizens, 
to'oomment upon such a state of things. 
The union of church and state s a curse 
to both. Fortunately, it is becoming an 
obsolete idea. It is loudly condemned 
by all liberal political economists of the 
age, as dangerous to the liberties ot the 
people, and injurious to the true in- 
terests of religion itself. However such 
an union might have aided, in the ear- 
lier ages of Christianity, to check the 
rude power of semi-baibarous kings, 
and to curb the tumultuous passions of 
the multitude — all agree ihai it is 
wholly inconsistent with the spirit and 
progress of modern civilization. The 
Church is for the spirilual guidance of 
men; the S{aie for the temporal gov- 
ernment» Both are distinct and inde- 
j)endent in their respective spheres of 
action, Neither is as sound and effec- 
tive, as when disconnected from the 
other : and neither can undertake to 
regulate the other, without endanger- 
ing the harmony of both." 

\Yhile then we must attribute some 



176 

of the religious freedom enjoyed in the 
colony of Maryland, as we have said 
above, to the peculiar circumstances 
m which the colony was placed, let 
us not deny to the Proprietary, the 
absence so far as ive can judge, of any 
disposition to infringe Upon the rights 
of others, and acquit him of giving any 
grounds for the loud out cry wiiicK 
seems sonietiraes to have been raised in 
the Province of ''No Popery." Let us 
not deny that under the Catholic govern- 
ment in Maryland, no encroachments 
were made upon Protestant rights, 
while on the contrary, under the 
Protestant government, various acts 
were passed "to prevent the growth of 
Popery." Let us not then deny to 
them the credit for so much toleration of 
other religions as under the circum- 
stances they are justly entitled to. 

To others, such as the worshipper at 
the Synagogue, and to those who pro- 
fessed no christian religion, the same 
toleration was not extended till many 
years after the Revolution, if indeed it 
may be said even yet to be fully guar- 
anteed to them. 

Let us refer for a moment to the changes 
^jnder the laws and Constitution of 



177 

oar state. 

The Declaration of Rights (art 83) 
in fact abolished the support of the 
church of England by law in Maryland 
and gave to all persons professing the 
christian religion equal protection in 
religious liberty, — the article runs in 
these words: 

"33. That it is the duty of every 
man to worship God in such manner as 
he thinks most acceptable to him; all 
persons professing the Christian Reli- 
gion are equally entitled to protection 
in their religious liberty, vvherefore, no 
person ought by any law to be moles- 
ted in his person or estate, on account 
of his religious persuasion, or profession, 
or for his religious practice, unless, 
under color of religion, any man shall 
disturb the good order, peace or safety 
of the State, or shall infringe the laws 
of morality, or injure others in their 
natural, civil or religious rights: nor 
ought any person to be compelled to 
frequent or maintain, or contribute 
unless on contract, to maintain any 
particular place ot worship, or any par-' 
ticular ministry, yet the legislature may, 
in their discretion^ lay a general and 
equal tax Jar the support of the chri2t- 



178 

ian religion; leaving to each individual 
the power of appointing the payment 
over of the money collected from him, 
to the support of any particular place 
of wot ship or minister^ or for the benefit 
of the poor of his own denomination, or 
the poor in general of any particular 
county, but the churches, chapels, glebes 
and all other property, now belonging 
to the church of England, ought to re- 
main to the church of England forever. 
And all acts of assembly lately passed, 
for collecting monies for building or re- 
pairing particular churches or chapels of 
ease, shall continue in force, and be 
executed, unless the legislature shall, 
by act, supersede or repeal the same: 
but no county court shall assess any 
quantity of tobacco, or sum of money, 
hereafter, on the application of any 
vestrymen or church wardens; and 
every incumbent of the church of Eng- 
land, who hath remained in his parish, 
and performed hi« duty, shall be enti- 
tled to receive the provisions and sup- 
port established by the act entitled "an 
act for the support of the clergy of the 
church of England in this province," 
till the November court of this present 
year, to be held for the county in which 



179 

his parish shall lie, or for such time as 
he hath remained in his parish, aod 
performed his duty." 

The part of the above article in 
Italics has been repealed and the power 
of the Legislature of levying a tax for 
the support of the Christian religion or 
any other tax for the support of religion 
was taken away by 1809 ch 167, conf 
1810 ch 24. The 35th art. of the Decla- 
ration of Rights as we shall presently 
show required a Declaration of belief 
in the Christian religion. In confor- 
mity with the Declaiation of Rights 
the 55 Art. of the Constitution also re- 
qnired of every person appointed to any 
office of profit or trust to subscribe a 
declaration of his belief in the chris- 
tian religion. 

As this act however excluded Jews 
from oflBce and was regarded by many 
as a want of that religious toleration 
which the enlightened age and the 
progress of a liberal spirit demanded, it 
was a continual subject of invective 
and debate until finally an act amend- 
ing the constitution was passed in 1834 
(ch 205; conf 1835 ch 33). It enac 
ted that every citizen ot the State, pro- 
fessing the Jewish religion, who should 



180 

thereafter be appointed to any office of 
public trust under the State of Mary*- 
land, in addition to the oaths or affir- 
mations required to be taken by the 
constitution and laws of this State or 
of the United States should make and 
subscribe a declaration of his belief in 
a future state of rewards and punish-» 
ments, instead of a declaration of a be- 
lief in the Christian religion. (1624 
^h 205; conf 1825 ch 33.) 

The constitution repugnant to the 
above act however was only repealed 
so far as respects the Jews and not as 
to others (ib sec 2). Thus it will be 
perceived^ that Mahometans, Infidels 
and the like are still excludftd from office 
in our State, and all who do not believe 
in a State of future rewards and punish- 
ments- 

(This it has been thought by some 
would also exclude some universalists.) 



AS TO THE OATHS OF OFFICE TO EE TA- 
KEN BY OFFICERS. 

In the previous article, it is shown, 
that it is necessary for any person ex- 
cept a Jew, appointed to any office tf 
profit or trust to subscribe a declaration 
«f his belief in the Christian religion.-—^ 



isi 

But there has been much legislation ort 
the subject and repealing and alteiiog' 
of old acts. 

The 36th Art. of the Der. Rights 
says: — The manner of administering 
an oath to any person, ought to be sucb 
as those of the religious persuasion, or 
denomination, of winch such person is 
one esteem the most effectual confirma- 
tion by the attestation of the Divine 
Eeing'. And also that the affirmation 
ofquakers &/C. ought to be received as 
an oath. 

And the 35th Art of the DeclaratioB 
ol Rights says: that "no other test or 
qualification ouorht to be required, on 
admission to any office of trust or pro- 
fit, than such oath of support and fidel- 
ity to this State, and such oalh of office 
as shall be directed by this eonvention 
or the Legislature of this State and a 
declaration of belief in the christian 
religion.''' The latter clause as we hav<^ 
just shown has now been altered. 

And the Constitution (43rd Art) pre- 
f.cribed that every person who shall of- 
fer to vote for delegates, or for electors 
of the Senate, or for Sheriff, shall, [ii 
required by any of the persons qualified 
to vote) before he be admitted to poU 



182 

t&ke such oath or affirmation of support 
and fidelity to this State as this conven- 
tion or the Legislature shall direct. 

At the time of the adoption of the 
Constitution, it was deemed important 
to guard the fidelit) and the allegiance 
of the office holders and others by fre* 
quent and multiplied oaths, that their 
obligations to the State might he too 
strong to admit of any breach of alle- 
giance; hence we find that in the Con- 
st tution were found the oaths to be 
taken by the electors of the Senate 
(Art 10), by the clerk of the council 
(art ^), by the senators and delegates 
at their annual meeting (art 28), and 
again before an election oi Governor 
and members of council (ib). and also 
by several of the higher officers, that 
they would not receive the profits of any 
other office, or for the supply of cloth- 
ing or provisions for the army (art 38) 
or ihftt they would not vote for any ro 
office through favor &c. but that they 
would vote for the persoft most fit and 
best qualified for the office (art 50), 
that they would not receive any fee or 
reward for doing their office but what 
the laws aU(.wed, or receive the profits 
o! any other office (art 52); and that 



18B 

tbey did not hold tlxemselves bound in 
allegiance to the King of Great Britain^ 
but would be faithful and bear true al* 
legiancc to the State of Maryland (art 
55). 

But after the revolution had passed 
and distrust had ceased to exist, it was 
found that the frequent recurrence ol 
the use of the oath detracted from its 
solemnity, and caused it to degenerate 
into a mere matter of form, without 
possessing that obligation on the con- 
science, which it should possess, and 
hence the whole of the above oaths have 
been abolished, and the following 
amendments of the constitution have 
taken their place. 

The amendment of 1797 (ch 18 conf 
1798 ch 83) gives to certain religious 
sects, to Quakers, Nicolites, Tunkers, 
Memnonists, the right to affirm instead 
of taking an oath; but the court must 
be satisfied that they are conscientious- 
ly scrupulous of taking an oath; and af- 
terwardsby 1817 (ch 61 conf 'Jfech 163) 
all persons professing tije Chsisnan 
religion who hold it unlawful to lake 
an oath on any occasion, shall be allow- 
ed to make a solemn affimiilion in the 
same manner that Quakers have hereto 



184 

fore been allowed to affirm, which 
affirmation shall be of the same avail 
as an oath to all intents and purposes 
whatever; and (sen 2) before any such 
person shall be admitted as a witness 
or jujor in any court ot justice in this 
State, the court shall be satisfied by 
competent testimony, that such perjon 
is conscientiously scrupulous of taking 
an oath. 

And again, by the act of 1822 (chap 
204, conf 1823, ch 116, sec 2) all the 
parts of the Constitution and form of 
Government relating: to oaths to be ta- 
ken by officers of government, w^ere re- 
pealed and by the first j^ectiun it was 
prescribed that every member of the 
Senate and of the House of Delegates, 
before he acted as such, should take 
the following oath: — **1, A B, do swear 
or affirm, (us the case may be) that I 
will be faithful and bear true allegiance 
to the State of Maryland and that 1 will 
support the constitution and laws there* 
of; that I wil! not, directly or indirect- 
ly, receive the profits or any part of the 
profits of any o'her office, during the 
time of my acting as Senator, (or mem- 
ber of the House of Delegates,) and 
ttiat I will faithfully discharge my duty 



185 

iis Senator (or member of the House of 
Delegates) without prejudice or par- 
tiality, to the best of my skill and judg- 
ment." ( 182-2, ch 204, conf 1823, c!i 
116,) and Electors of the Senate and 
ail Executive and Judicial officers, be- 
fore they act a3 such, and all Jurors, 
elected or appointed to any office ot 
profit or trust, civil or military, before 
entering upon the duties thereof, shali 
respectively take and subscribe tiie fol- 
lowing oath or affirmation, to wit — **], 
A B, do swear or affirm (as the case 
may be,) that 1 will be faithful and 
bear true allegiance to the State of 
Maryland, and that I will support the 
Constitution and laws thereof, and that 
1 will, to the best of my skill and 
jtido;ment, diligently and faithfully, 
wilhout partiality or prejudice, execute 

the office of , according to the 

Constitution or laws o( this State.'' 

Thus will it be seen that the old re- 
strictions of the Constitution have been 
jrradually relaxing, and the qualifica- 
tions for office and the declarations of 
religious belief have become much more 
enlarged than they formerlv were. 



MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS. 

Having occupied as mucb space in 
the foregoing detail as our limits would 
allow, w€ propose here to mereij 
glance at th€ following topics, as being; 
«f more particular interest: — 

1. The Revolution of 1€36. 

2. The Reform Bill of 1636-7. 

«3. Th« First Election under it; and 
Ihe arrangement of the Executive 
and Senatorial Districts. 

4. Tiie cost of the Md. Judiciary 

5. The History of the Internal im- 
provement System of Md, 

6. Education. 

7. The Census. 



MHS^Iill-ILi^HllS/lJS'^ 



. CHAPTER I. 

THE REVOLUTION OF 1836-^ 
THE EIGHT MILLION BILL &c. 

The year 1836 was eventful in Mary- 
land. The Session of the General 
Assembly which commeneed on ti'.e 
28th December, 1835, reojained active- 
ly engaged in legislative duties, until 
the 4th of Aprilj and then adjourned 
for some weeks, principally for tlie 
purpose of ascertaining the disposition 
of their constituents in regard to the 
propriety of passing or rejecting a bill 
in relation to Internal Improvements- 
and ways and means for executing them, 
which had been framed after much 
deliberation and excited the deepest in- 
terest in its progress, and was discussed 
with much animation, a majority of the 
members being reluctant t© assume for 
the State so vast a responsibility as it 
proposed, without more than comoiCiQ 
precaution. 



189 

On the 2-2d May the body re-assem- 
bled, and during a session of a fortnight, 
finally matured and passed the bill 
alluded to. It proposed that three 
Commissioners to be appointed by the 
Executive, should proceed lo borrow, 
either in Europe or this country, upon 
the best terms they could obtain, ou 
the faith of the State, bonds or certifi- 
cates of Slock, bearini; an interest of 
six per cent, not redeemable in less 
than forty years, tue ^Uiu of ei^hi 
millions of dollars. 

The comrnissionets v. fre hrnited 
however not to neootiate, unless a 
premium could be obtained on said loaii, 
which should net at least 20 per cent i.o 
the treasury. This premiuna was panij 
appropriated to the pavuient of ibe m- 
terest which should accrue on the ioao 
for the first three years^aud xh*^ residue 
together with the bonus receivable up- 
on sundry new bank charters, and tL& 
total receipts from the various works 
of Internal Invprovement effected by 
this bill, were appropriated as a Sink- 
ing Fund adequate to the discharge oi 
the principal debr, beioretne expiratiori 
of the period tor which it was to be oc- 
laiued. iVMu i^avini'; the fctaie tiereafitr 



190 

in possession of a large and lucrative 
stock. 

The deep anxiety of the friends of 
Internal Improvements for the accom- 
plishment of tho vast undertakings 
which were to bring the emporium of 
Maryland into a fair competition witi 
ihe cities of the Union, for trade am 
commerce, and especially for the fate 
oftho3estu|>endous undertakings which 
had already made considerable progress 
at the expense of the State and its 
Citizens, but were as yet unproductive 
because so far from being completed, 
was no\v apparently in a fair way to be 
gratified, and the certainty of the com- 
pletion of those works hailed as the 
commencement of a new era ot pros- 
perity; when the whole scheme Tias 
unexpectedly arrested by a |:olii\csl 
incident which diverted for a time th • 
attention of every member of communit} 
from all thoughts of improvement to the 
more immediate necessity of preserving 
the very existence of tht; Government 
Itself. 

The Administration of President 
Jackson, being about to close, the State 
of Maryland, as well as the rest of the 
Union, was much divided as to the 



191 

choice of a successor. The triends of 
the existing Administration SHj^ported 
the election of Martin Van Buren —the 
opposition advocated General William 
H. Harrison — each party was sanguine 
of success in Maryland, and upon the 
vole of Maryland, many supposed the 
election to depend, or at least, that an 
election by the primary electors might 
be won or lost. 

To the excitement incident to the 
election of a President of the Union, 
was added on this occasion the deep 
interest which the people of Maryland 
always take in the election of a new 
State Senate, which, continuma: as it 
did for five years, gave a decided in- 
clination in the State Government, in 
favor of the party which succeeded in 
that election. 

During the electioneering, the Ad- 
ministration party in this State, availed 
themselves with great effect, of the 
objections which a large body of the 
people iti many of the counties, and 
more or less in all of them, felt to the 
State embarking in such extensive pro- 
jects, and becoming so deeply involved, 
as had been adventured by the Whig 
Legislature of the preceeding sessions. 



192 

For, although the opposite partj had in 
full proportion participated in the nriea- 
sure, yet according to the well known 
practice of parlies, the majority are 
always made accountable for ail faults. 
The disaffection on the subject alluded 
to, went to such extent, that in St. 
Mary's and Charles counties, the elec- 
tion of Electors of State Senate was 
contested hardly at all upon the ground 
of politics, but between a Whig ticket 
ot friends to Interiial Improvenient,and 
a ticket combining those of both parties 
opposed to the Internal Improvement 
bill — and that subject^was the theme in 
the canvass. 

Besides the Internal Improvement 
bill, the same party availed themselves 
of the unpopularity of the bill which 
had also passed the previous legislature 
by the joint efforts of both political 
parties, for indemnifying the sufferers 
by the mob which occurred in the city 
of Baltimore in August 1835, to which 
object the avails of the Auction Duties 
were applied until the amount should 
be discharged. This bill gare great 
offence in some sections of the State, 
and operated powerfully as i»n etection- 
eenng theme amongst certain classes in 



193 

BaUiniore city and county. 

The party which had associated in 
other directions, particularly in Freder- 
ick, Wdsiiii gton, Hariord and Cecil 
counties, in iuvor of a Reform in the 
Constitution oi the Stale, formed 
originally of members of both political 
parties, had now become of such con-* 
siderable force as to b:) very much of 
an object ior party politicians to avail 
themselves ofm some way. It became 
obvious that, for the sake of success, 
they v\ ould be as likc)y to take sides and 
identify themselves with a party, as 
that a party tinding itsclt alone unequal 
to its rival, would alHmpt a union with 
such powerful allies for (l.e sai^e of in- 
suring success. Some leaders of the 
Administration party were now ex- 
tremely anxious uj lorm li)is association 
in those counties in wliich Kefoim was 
most popular — in other sections the 
topic was kept out of view as much as 
possible. 

These several considerations had 
great influence in the election of Klec- 
tors of the State Senate,and contributed 
to reduce the large majority which the 
Whigs had at the previous election, to 
a mere majojitj. Twenty-one Whigs 



194 

and nineteen Adaiinistration men, were 
elected. 

On tlicdav appointed for the meeting; 
of the Coilej^e of Electors at Annapolis, 
tlie whole of the Whig members attend- 
ed and (pialirted — but as the Constitu- 
tion required thjJt not less '.haii twenty- 
f.!ur members should constili.te a quorum 
for the election of a Senate, the min- 
ority, in>tead of attending; the College, 
met at l\ q City Hotel in secret con- 
clave with s:)me proinmeot men ot the 
Administration party, and came to a 
determination not to attend, unless the 
twenty-onti Electors won'd consent that 
they, the nineteen, should he allowed 
to name a majority of the Senate about 
to be elected. 

'11)0 qualified Klecf^rs declined to 
receive any communicat on touching 
their duty, or the mar-in-^r of its per- 
forniance from a body ^o imkjiown to 
the Constitution — and remained igno- 
rant of tlie exact tenor of the proposi- 
tion itself, until it appeai'ed in the form 
of a manifesto i?* the Baltimore papers. 
After renv'ininu; tliree days at Anna* 
polls, the nineteen E'ectors separated, 
announcin<>: in their manifesto, that 
they thereby resigned into the hands of 



105 

the/ people, the authority with which 
they had clothed them— and that a» 
they considered that this course would 
terminate tlie exislence of the Senate, 
and conse(}iienfly, of tiie Constitution 
and thean.h>rity (if a!! t!'.e ofncers {»f 
annnal appDiatnient, \hi-y stijrgest that 
a Convention, to consist of six persons 
from each county and citv, should riieet 
at the City of "Ajsnapolls o:» the 3d 
Monday of Novembi-r. ^> conlinue nil 
such appoinlmcnls unlH anew Consilium 
Hon should be formed bij a Convention 
to be called for thai pinpase., 
W 'I'he I Fridican-.entin uhidi the people 
of the State so u:iexpeftedly found their 
governin*2st,idl the diingcr of impend- 
ing anarry a!id civil strife to which an 
aCtenipt t<i carry ont the proposed pro- 
ject would inevitahiy have led, was 
well calculated to arouse thecoinmuniiy 
and altiiough perhiips nine-tenths oV 
the ndminisijation party, if their opin- 
ion had been consulted, previous to 
adopting such a step would have dis- 
approved of it.yet sucli is the influence 
of patty association, that as the step 
was taken, anil taken ;s a party mea- 
are, the great majority of the party 
determined to sustain ir. 



1D6 

Time was liardly allowed for the 
news of this mcvtinf iit (o reach the 
remote countic?, before the election for 
members of the popular branch of the 
legislature en me on, and afibrded the 
people an opportunity ol evincing iheir 
disapprobation. Only twenty, of the 
eighty deleeiates, were returned of that 
party, and all the electors of that party, 
who were candidates, were defeated. 

Only one of the recusant electors, 
John 6. Sellman, Es()., of Anne Arun- 
del County, recognised this public ex- 
pression so far as to meet the College. 
His colleagues, Wesley Linthicuni» 
and iJr. Duvall, of Montgomery county 
published their determination to adhere 
to the course they had taken. 

A second opportunity for an expres- 
sion of public sentiment was afforded 
by the election of Electors of President 
and Vice President, which took place 
five weeks after the election of Dele- 
gates, and resulted in a signal deteat of 
the Administration party. The aggre- 
gate Whig majority in the State was 
3,513. 

Notwithstanding the openly avowed 
design of destroying the existing Con- 
stitution, and the attempt in Several^ 



197 

and success in s()nie,orthe countios, to 
elect nietnbers to the su^^j^ested Conven- 
tion, which was to assume authority 
over the Constitution as well as public 
officer?, the Executive h^d refrained 
fr.im issuino^ a Praclamniioti iu this 
junolure of afiairs, becausL' the elections 
wtre so near at hand, Ihil such a mea- 
sure would have been deuounceil as an 
interlciencfr to alTect the result. On the 
8th day of November, tlie day sncced = 
ing the election, however, tiie'Procla- 
niation was issued, ajid (he Lcj^isLiture 
was directed to meet on ihe 21st of the 
same month, to provide I'oi the exig;encj. 
On the I5th howevir, Wesley 
LiNTHicuM, one of the rerns;;nt Electors 
for Anne Arutulel co. jsublished a noli- 
fication of his intention to meet the 
College of Elec.'ors and (jualify on the 
19th. and iiivitin<r the oiher seceders 
to meet him at that time, and assist in 
electing a Senate. 

On the IBt'i, xMessr^. J. B. Thomas 
and George, the recusant Klec'crs for 
Q'leen Ann's, and Mr. Fount.iin Uir 
Caroline, also entcrt'd the Co'lege, 
qualified, and the College immediately 
proceeded to elect a Senate. 

The appoiarinent oi Com mission era 



198 

to iiegnciate <lie Inlf mal Improvement 
loan, had nu antin;*^ btrn pfisljoncd ly 
ihe Esecuiivt', in constqvu nee of llicse 
proccfdiiifi^s wliM-li not only tlirtattned 
the peace and trriiiquiilily, butliie very 
existence (;rt!ie Stale ai.d eonsecjuent- 
ly mateiinlly {.ffeiMea i!s cndit. 

Tlie scn^a^loll whiih (lie pitK-eedings 
of tlie minoiitv Elcetois creatrd, ex- 
tended over tiie whole Union, ftom 
the certainty wliit h wjis < bvioiis to all, 
that if constitutional minorities cannot 
be held to ihc ir obiif^aiions by tlie force 
of public virtue, tSuie must be an end 
at onte io our Republican System. The 
successful example of a eoiispjia-y tf 
the character of the one attempted en 
this occasif n would be lej-orled lo by 
every di5>appoint'd faction, and endless 
tnrn^oii \v<tuld succeed, for ti.e Constitu- 
tion of the Uniuis, :;nd of every St:ite in 
the Union would a!wa\s be liable to 
such assaults. Happy for the Republic 
as well as for Mai viand, was the 
promptitude v. iih wiiich the People 
themselvt'S rallied on this eccasion, ^nd 
so signally rebuked the attempt. 



CHAPTER 11. 

REFORM OF THE CONSTITU- 
TION OF ^MARYLAND. 

Public opinio!) could hanlly liave 
been inore eun h:iticaliy expressed iir 
relation to the revol-jtion nttt-nipted in 
September, 1836, by the iiinele!."ii re- 
cusant Eleetois (T the State Seriate, 
than it wa>j at tlie elecnnn wliicb took 
place in October for Delegates to the 
Geneial Assembly. Of tlte clo;hty 
Kienibers of u hicb that house was < om- 
posed, only twenty attached to tlie Van 
Buren party w: ich had cuuntetiaiiced 
the measure, succeeded to seats, most 
of lliciu by very small majoritie*-, and 
sume of then) only by publicly disavow- 
ing the conduct ol the recusants. 

'jMie Leiiis'ature th^retore consisted 
of a Whia yenale, (unanimcu?,) and of 
R House of DelciiaUs consisting of si.xty 
Wiii;2;sand twenty Van Buienists. 

The eiiiii OS-ins topic ot the session 
was the foiiumplatt'd Rtifoii'vi in the 
State Consiitution. 



200 

' The Van Buren members were much 
diviJe<l upon this que«tioi amon;»st 
tht-mselves. In relation to their course 
as a party, some opposed any other 
project than that of assemblin'i a Con* 
veniion to t'oriii an entire new Constitu- 
tion; others strtnijously objected to that 
process and insisted upon Reform by 
the constltuti"nal process. A^i-iin upon 
the extent of the proposed chan^^e they 
were widely at variance with others. — 
A number of private meetii)o-s were 
held with t!ie view ot ail-.-ptiiig some 
expedient which wa\:ld enable them to 
act together as a party, which resulted 
finally in their agreeing to disagree 
upon the subject. 

Upon the General Asembly, con- 
Btituiionally organized and empowered 
as a Convention upo.n the Ccnstitu- 
TiON, as is wisely provided by that in- 
strument, now devolved the duty of 
deliberating upon the provisions of the 
Coiisiituti in, and of pioposing such 
Reforms therein as would render it 
more acceptable to the peo|)!e and 
better adapte4 to the altered < ondition 
of the State. They approached the 
subject with all that circumspi'ction 
which should be observed when the 



201 

orsinic laws are about to be chang* 
eU — and after several weeks temperate 
discussion, during which a full share of 
talent wjs exhibited in debate npon the 
several propositions submittd, two 
bills passed botli brandies with an un- 
ftnimit}' uhich perhaps has seldom been 
witnessed iip>n any so important and 
difficuk a subject in the deliberate 
asseiiblies of ihisor any othe;' Republic. 
The bills passed the Senate without 
one disseiUing voice. In the House of 
Delefjates t'»e votes were fifty-nine 
for, and fouhtf-en against the bills, — 
Of tiie latter njm()*T seven were Whigs, 
viz: I from St. Marv's 2 from Charles, 
3 fro.ii Calvert, and I froni Vorcester 
— the ren'.aininpr seven were Van Bureii 
men, viz: 1 from Charley, I from CaN 
vert, 3 from Cecil and 2 from Allegany 
the men.be's of wh.ieh party divided 
13 for, a!ul 7 againstJtlie bill. The 
Whig members stood 5*2 for, and 7 
egainst the bill. 

rkform proposed. 
The bilhthjs pi'^S'd proposed entirely 
to rem:)did the Executive and Legisla- 
tive departnirrjts. 

EXKC'JTlVfc; DF.PARTMENT. 

The Governjf, ioittead of being elec- 



202 

led annually by joint "ballot of both 
houses of tlie General Assembly, by 
this act was to be elected lor threa 
years by a general vote of the people, 
and is ineligible for tbe next teiin. 

The State was divided into three 
Gubernatoiial distri(t>, of which the 
Eastfrn Shore counties constifule one; 
St. Marys, Charles, Calvert, Prince 
George's, Montgomery and Anne Arun- 
del cour.tiesand the cilies ol Baltimore 
and Annapolis, constilnte another; and 
the remaining counties of the State the 
oihcr (iislrict; iind iiom these dif^trictSt 
Rlternatclv.lhe Governor was to be chos" 
en, addinj; to the qualifications hereto- 
fjro rec^uired, that he sliall have 
resided at least three years in the dis- 
trict, fiom which lie may be elected. 

The Executive Council was abolish- 
ed, and all the f xccutive powers in 
futute weie to be exercised Ly the 
Governor, and in cases o' icnportaiU 
p.ppointnents by and with the advice 
and consent ol the Senate — to whom 
however hs was forbidden to re-nom- 
inate the same | eison when once re-* 
jetted by them, except at their request. 
The oifice ol CleriC to the Council 
^\'as abolibhcd, and a Sccrttarv of State 



2tl3 

rabstitufed, io be ajiiiually appointed 
by tlieGdveinor.siibjtcl to ihe approval 
olthe Senate. 

In case of a vacancy in tl.e cffice of 
Ouveinor, llie^Gtnetai Afi^etnbly were 
byj(.inl ballot lo ptcceed to fill the s^ame 
f ( r (he rt^sidiie of the trim Item the 
samepbeinatorial distiict. Meantime, 
MntW it is so filled, the Secretary of 
State shall act as Governor, or iirc?s» 
of vacancy in that eflue, the Presidt^nt 
of the Senate, and should (lia* he also 
vacant, the Speaker of the House of 
Delegates officiates ss Governor. 

The first ejection rf Governor imtter 
this act was held on the 1st Wc(ines° 
day in October 1638: lots v/ere drawu 
todeteimine I'loin which gobcrnatorial 
district lire first and {he second choice 
was to be made. 

The tern) of his cffice « omnjenccd 
t)n the 1st Monday in January 1839, 
and contiiiutd f . r three yeaisand until 
.a successor was cliosen and (jualilied. 

LEGISLATIVE-DEPAKTMl KT. 

^ Senate. — The leitns of the old 
Senate expired so soon as a ntvv Senate 
\vas elected and (lualificd ui der this 
Reform act, according to the Conslilu- 
Hon and Laws of the Slate* 



204 

tt was to be compose;! of twenty-one 
members — one to bi' elected by ballot 
ofthe vottrs in the city of Daiiimore, 
and one in like manner in each county 
of the State. 

[ Theteim of one-third of those first 
elected, expired in two year?; one other 
t inl in f.mr years, and tlu* rcnaining 
third in six year»; ihey were to be clas5i« 
fiexl ti) t'^it effct i:nvned!ately on first 
a=;st'.T»'jUn J", and in such mariner as the 
Sen'^tors should prescribe. Thus, one 
third of the bo;ly nre to !jc elec'ed 
every two yeari*; and after the first 
terms expire, are to serve f r six years, 
and are inelio^ible to re election. 

Vacancies aro t;) be filled by a new 
election in the count/ or city, for the 
residue of the teru'i. 

Hou^E OF Dklegatis — Until ihQ 
new census of IS40 v.a> olficialiy pto. 
tnuiu:fd, tlie House of Delegates con- 
sisted of a specifi^.Ml lunnher. 

After the official pro;nul;;ation of the 
census of IS4{), and after every secoiid 
census thereafter, the ratio of lepresen- 
tatives in the Hous.i of Drlcoratcs, wa^ 
fixed accordin;; to the follovviuLi b.jsis. 

Every county hav'Ug less iImii I5,00(> 
souls, federal uuiiibets, 3 delegules'. 



205 

■ Over 15,000. and less than 25,000, 4 
delegates 

Over 25.000. and Ic^s than 35,000, 5 
delegates; 

Over 35,000, 6 de'ep;atPS. Z 

The city of Ballimore to have as 
many deltgntes as the county having 
the hirgcst dele». ation. 

The city of Annapolis shall cease to 
send a distinct delegation, and be here- 
after incorporated as a part of Anne 
Arundel county. 

Electigns, — The. first elpction ot 
Governor, Senatois and Delej^ates, under 
this act, took place on ihe llr^t Wednes- 
day in Octoher, 1838; and all the elec- 
tions thereader ueieto be held on the 
first JVcdiiisday, instead cf the first 
Monday in October. 

Master akd Slave — The relation 
of master and slave in this state, shall 
not be abolished, usiless a bill to abol- 
ish the same, shall be passed by a unan- 
imous vote of the members of each 
branch of the General Assembly, bs 
published at least thiee months before 
the next election of delegates to the 
General Assembly, and be confirmed 
by a like unanimous vote at the next 
regular session — nor then williout A?^ 



206 

eompensalion to the master. 

Seat OF G)vernmk\t^ &c. — Anua* 
pol:s is secured a< the Seat of Govern- 
ment, an'l tho place fw holding the 
sessions «if the Court oi Appeals of the 
WesiCM Shore, anil- of t!ie Court of 
Chanci.'ry, 

C'erks of the County Courts^ and 
Reorders of fVUls, and Reo;isler in 
Ckiincenj. — I5y a bill, distinct iVom the 
foregoing, the Constitution was altered 
as lo t!:e mode o\ elioosinfr nnd as to the 
term of office of those officers. 

They were to be appointed by the 
Governor, by and with the advice and 
consent of the Senate, for the term of 
seven y^ars 

Pe^-sons holding these offices at the 
time of this act were hov\ever,exccpted 
from its operation till ]S45. 



CHAPTER HI, ■ 
FIRST ELECTIOX OF GOVERN- 

OR AND ARUANGEMENT OF DISTHICTS. 

The first election, under the Reform 
Bill, when the Governor was elected 
by the ptM^ple, took place on the 1st 
Wedneid;u' ii Ociober 1838. VVilliain 
Grayson, Esq., of the Eastern Shore, 
was elected and qualified on the 1st 
Monday i.j January 1839 to serve for 
three years. His salary by the bill 
was iixed at$4,'20{) per annum, and he 
was required to reside at tlie seat of 
government, where a furnished dwelling 
is provided by the State. 

The fir«t ^election in the Wcsfern 
District, by the people, rcsuUed in the 
choice of Francis Thomas, E^Jj.; and 
the first election in the thitd district iu 
the choice of Thomas G. Prat^ Esq. 

GUBERNATORIAL DISTRICTS. 

According to the provisions of the 
amendment of 1830, continued 1837, to 
the Constitution of Maryland, the State 
hasbeeu divided into three Gubernator* 



208 

tfl/ Districts, from each of which the 
Governor is lo be chosen alternalelj. 

The Ivst or ''Ecsion District," is 
composed of Cecil, Ktnt, Quetn Ar.ne's, 
Talbot, Caroline, Dorchesier, Somerset 
and Worcester counties, — or \vh?it is 
'denominated the Eastern Shote of 
Marvhmd. From this distiiti the 
Governor was elected, on the first 
"Wednesday in October. 1838, and is in 
future to be elected every nint years 
thercaftei*. 

7'he Second cr *'tVestein Disfrici,^' 
is composed ot Baltimore, Haiford, 
Carroll, Frederick, Washington and 
Allegany counties. A Governor was to 
be elected Irom this district, <;n the 1st 
Wednesday in October, 1841, and on 
the same day every ninth year there- 
after. 

The Third or '^Sculkern Bislrict,^' 
is composed of, St. Mary's, Charles, 
Calvert, Prince George's, AnneAruui 
del and J\Iontf:?mery counties and the 
cities of Baltimore and Annapolis. A 
Governor was to be elected from this 
district, on the 1st Wednesday in 
October, 1844, and every mnlh year 
thereafter. 'Ihe Governor is elected 
t each case to serve for three jears, 



209 

fer;d is not eligible for re-election. In 
ease of vacancy occuring in the office, 
the successor serves onlj for the residue 
of the term. 

SEXATORrAL ARRANGCluENT^ 

The first Senate of Maryland, under 
the amended Constitution, qualified on 
the firht Mondaj in December, 1838. 

According to the amendments as 
carried out by the Senate, January 
1839, immediately after their tormation, 
the Senators of the Slate were classified 
so as th&t the term of one-third of the 
member* sliall expire every second 
year. 

The jir5^ Senatorial election, under 
^his arrangement, took place on the 
first Wednesday in October 1840, and 
h to take place on the same day of 
every sixth year thereafter, at which 
time a Senator is to be elected for 
eoch, the 

City of Baltimore, Baltimore Countj, 
Allegany County, Washingfon County, 
Cecil County, Queen Anne's Couaty, 
Worcester County. 

The second Senatorial election takes 
place on the first Wednesday in Oc- 
tober, 1842, and in the same countses 
every six h year thereafter, at v,'h.:zh 



210 

time a Senator is to be elected for eacl 
of the following counties: 

Charles County, Calvert County- 
Caroline County, Anne Arundel Coun 
tj, Prince George's County, Mont- 
gomery County, Somerset County. 

The third Senatorial election takes 
place on the first Wednesday in Oc- 
tober, 1844, and in the same countief 
on every sixth year thereafter, at which 
time a Senator is :o be elected, for each 
of the following counties: 

St. Mary's County, Kent County 
Talbot County, Dorchester County i 
Frederick County, Harford County 
Carroll County. 



CHAPTER III. 

THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT 
SYSTEM. 

The peculiarly favorable position of 
Maryland, as a central state of the 
Union, and as presenting the most 
favorable route for rapid and easy 
communication with the valley of the 
West was not unobserved by her citi- 
zens, or allowed to remain long un- 
improved by them. They marked the 
superiority of her water courses as a thor- 
oughfare for trade, and the fact that 
the waters of the west and those of the 
Atlantic approach nearer to each other 
by the Potomac valley than by any 
other route, which will always render 
that the most eligible direction for 
trade. 

The precise data which amply sus- 
tain the superiority of this route wer* 
collected and published before the peo« 
pie of Maryland undertook to mak- 
that connection by the artificial high 
ways which she is now constructiog,-. 



212 

These data have never yet been con- 
troverted — and they cannot be. 

it was to Gneral George Washing- 
ton hiniself, as the pioneering engineer 
of such a project, that the state of 
Maryland is indebted for the sugges- 
tion. He was one of the first of sur- 
veyors, as well as of warriors and of 
statesiren. Gen. George Washington 
presided in the first internal improve- 
ment convention that ever assembled 
in the United States. This convention 
met at the city of Annapolis, perhaps in 
the year 1785, at any rate immediately 
after the revolution, tor the purpose of 
promoting the project of improving 
these peculiar advantages of position.—- 
Many of the most eminent men of that 
day were in that convention. Inspire 1 
hy the views there presented, the state 
of Maryland was induced to embark 
in the undertaking,and at that early pe- 
riod, exhausted as the country then was 
bv the recent struggle for independence 
Maryland led the way towards "internal 
improvements," fully persuaded of tlie 
capacities that nature had stamped upon 
her position for becoming the lavorite 
depot of the vast^trade which would 
cne day find its way across the Ali^-. 



its 

gany ridge and connect the iniliioiis of 
people that would inhabit each side of 
the mountains. Large expenditures 
were authorised by the legislature to 
improve those facilities. 

The old Maryland canal was pro- 
bably the first canal constructed in this 
country, l^ut it was with a vii^w to tlie 
improvement of the navigation of the 
Potomac river that the principal ex~ 
p.enditure was- then authoiijed by the 
state. So little, however, did the 
peojjle of this country then know of the 
science of internal improvements, that 
it is nwt 'o be wondered at that the 
details of those new enterprizes shouM 
be ill-directed and unfortunate. The 
£.ttempt to make the bed of the Potomac 
river navigable, drained (he treasury of 
the slate of Maryland of the then very 
formidable sum of $140,000, w-thout 
realising any benefit whatever. 

Nor was t!.e next project in which 
pome of her citizens were induced to 
en^bark, with olheis of t'le adjoining 
state of Delaware, a whit more fortu-: 
Rate. Tile inhnbitants ot that part ot 
the two states which lies between Elk 
River, leading into the head of the 
Chesapeake, and the DeKware Lay^ 



^14 

caught at the idea of connecting t)ie 
two bays by a canal. How little was 
tnen known in this country on the sub- 
ject of canalling, was sufficiently illus* 
trated by the fac*: that after holding a 
few public meetings upon the subject, 
it was finally resolved to commence 
the work upon their own hook, under 
the firm persuasion that it was little 
more oi a task than to dig a common 
mill race — and to work they went ac- 
cordingly with all due enthusiasm. 

They soon got tired ol digging how^ 
ever — and came to the conclusion that 
it would be better to form an associa- 
tion and employ workmen. Very con- 
siderable funds w-ere raised, dnd an 
engineer appointed, who happened to 
know, that before a canal could be 
effective^ a feeder must be found to 
supply water upon its summit level, and 
to work he went with a formidable 
force to conduct a neighboring stream 
of water to the point of elevation. To 
excavate this sub-canal, exhausted the 
whole of the funds of the company, an<i 
when the water was at last let into it^ 
they found to their utter dismay, that 
ihe natural absorption of the earth in 
ts length exhausted every drop of the 



215 

water the stream afforded and there was 
lone left for the main canal. 

To the stock ol the Chesapeake and 
Delaware Canal company, which suc- 
ceeded that project the state subse- 
quently subscribed $50,000. The in- 
vestment proved totally unproductive, 
Ihe principal part of the stock of this 
company was furnished by citizens of 
Philadelphia, and the expenditure was 
'.mmensely beyond their highest es- 
jmatesofits cost, say upwards of two 
millions of dollars. 

^ These discouraging results for a lono- 
ime paralised the spirit of internal im' 
irovements in Maryland. It was many 
/ears before it could again be roused 
nto action, and when awakened, the 
recgraphical localities of the state were 
ouud to have organized parties which 
or a long time presented insurmoun^ 
able barriers to any progress whatever. 
The Susquehanna interest, and the 
"^otomac interest, were at direct vari- 
^nce. Neither of them were strong 
nough to carry any measure in the 
egislature whilst the eastern shore 
-ounties remained hostile to opening 
avenues by ^either, that might bring 
competitors to a market of which thev 



2l6 

now enjoyed a kind of monopoly from 
their superior facilities of access. From 
this cause Maryland remained inactive 
for nearly half a century after the fail- 
ure of her first enterprise. 

It was not until aroused by the bold 
and successful strides of New York 
in opening an avenue to the great 
western lakes— and witnessing the gi- 
gantic enferpiise commenced by Penn- 
sylvania \yitU a view to secure the 
Vt^estern trade — and the movements of 
Virginia towards connecting the James 
River with the Kanahawa,that at length 
were the eyes of the whole people 
of Maryland opened to the (act, that if 
her own superior natural advantages 
were much longer neglected, her more 
enterprising neighbors would soon leave 
her no chance for trade with the in- 
terior, except throu;;li the channels of 
which they held the keys. Would th.e 
people of JMaryland fold their arms in 
listless ulle^es^ aiid see their neighbors 
running away with profitable trade that 
v/as seeking her avenues, was now the 
question. 

To tliese considerations ^were super- 
added an estimate of the vast resources 
which the coal and iron mines of the 



217 

'Allegany region had now begun t& 
develope. Whether they were to re- 
main totally inoperative for lack of 
sufficient enterprise to connect them 
with the seat of trade, or bj an effort 
on the part of the state, be opened to 
profitable use, was now also an enquiry. 

It had been one of the characteristics 
of Mary landers to be distin«;^ui£hed for 
enterprise. The predicament into which 
slie had recently fallen was not that of 
apathy, but of unfortunate jealousies. 
By the paralyzing influence of this 
spirit iht opportunity of improving the 
avenues of either the Potomac or the 
Susquehanna in pursuit of the trade of 
the west, had been prevented — a too 
contracted view of the true interest of 
the state was taken by some of her 
influential men. She lost much by 
not pushing the improvements of 
her natural position, as was first de- 
termined upon — and fell behind one of 
the states at least, instead of leading in 
the career of internal improvements. 

Awake at length to a sense of what 
was really at stake, the different parties 
coalesced, and noW; all was enthusiasm 
for a participation in the trade which 
constituted so essential a part of our 



218 

prosperity. Enterprise and improvig* 
ments became the order of the day. — 
New York was making her fortune 
before our eyes, by her canals — and 
was pushing her trade to the very Ohio, 
which was so much nearer to us. The 
Maryland avenues were again brought 
into view. And the cities of the Dis- 
trict — the state of Virginia and Ohio— 
and at length the general government 
itself, was enlisted in the project for 
improvement* 

The spirit of that day wasadmirable. 
The enterprise was commenced uudei 
fair prospects — and for a time the 
career v.as onward. 

But difficulties were in the path. — 
The state had become fairly embarked 
and made a heavy investment m this 
main undertaking of connecting the 
Chesapeake with the Ohio by a canal, 
when an entirely new project was start- 
ed, of connecting the city of Baltimore 
with the same points on the Ohio by 
a rail road. This suggestion at once 
captivated the Baltimore community. 
The state seconded their views — and a 
rival work was forthwith r-tarted, and 
soon come into collision with the prior 
association, for the right of way. \Ji\^ 



219 

pleasant feelings, bickerings, disputes, 
law suits, injunctions, following each 
other in succession, and at length both 
works were locked up in cliancery. 

The expenses, vexations and delajg 
incident to such controversies at length 
brought the belligerent parties to per- 
ceive tiieir follj^ A compromise was 
efifected, and after loosing much ot their 
money, their credit, and of the public 
confidence, they agreed to jog on to- 
gether,and construct two great thorough* 
tares, instead of one. throui^h the same 
avenue. 

Til is, for Maryland, was truly a stu- 
pendous undertaki?ig — and the more so, 
seeing, that the general government 
having passed under different contro', 
now deserted the enterpri?,e. The 
District cities had become overwhelmed 
with their jfiarticipation in it and could 
aid no more — -and Virginia had circum- 
scribed her resources in order to com- 
plete her :^\^x\ projects, Maryland was 
eft alone, to get on with her works as 
.he could. 

And now again came up interests in 
)ehalf of other projects. A rail load to 
:onnect the city of Baltimore with the 
Susquehanna, and a canal to conneci 



2£0 

die Peunsylvania canal with the tidi 
water of the Chesapeake; — a rail road 
to extend the length of the Eastern 
Shore counties — and another u} on the 
Atlantic border, in Worcester county, 
were all urged upon the legislature — 
and it was found after repeated experi<^ 
ments, absolutely in vain to attempt to 
get appropriations For any one of these 
projects, including tho.-e of the Poto- 
mac, unless all tlie others, except that 
ot Worcester, were acconunodeted also. 
It became a sin;^Ie question then, not 
'.vhether, instead of commencing and 
( ompictin^ one work at a time, as all 
admitted would have been the wisest 
course for ti^e slate, if it could have 
been ejected, but whether the slate 
should intrepidly attempt to execute 
the whole at once, — or, should see the 
whole at once abandoned. Though the 
course of wisdom was obvious enough, 
yet the obstacles to pursuing that 
course were rendeied inveterate by 
local perttuacities^ — and no alternative 
was left. 

It was a most embr.rrassing position, 
and the legislature aff:'^ a lo g session 
and an elaboriite (iiscussion, during 
which every expedient to get^on with 



221 

a put only, was faithfully tr'ed, finally 
hesit:ited to decide, until they adjouretl 
and went home to their constituents 
for express instructions upon the ul- 
timate question, whether the state should 
so far involve itself as to undertake the 
whole of those projects at once? They 
took with them in their hands the pro- 
ject, denominated "the eight millions 
blll,^* whic'Ii amount of money was in- 
volved in their several estimates, and 
deliberated at home and amongst their 
own influential advisers, what in such 
a case ought to be done. 

They relumed to the extra ^e^?ion of 
133G, with the distine^ exprt-ssion of 
ihe public voice. The people of Mary- 
land deliberately instructed them to 
proceed with the imrTovements, — the 
law was passed, aijd Maryland decided 
at every hazard that tho>e works of 
improvement should be completed. 

Predicating upon this conclusion, the 
several internal improvement com- 
panies forthwith went to work and in* 
ciirred heavy outlays in pu>.hing on 
their enterprizes. All of them, with 
the exception of that of the Eastern 
Shore rail road, which was abandoned, 
tkre at this d:»y either in operation, or 



222 

hr progressing towards completion. 

The course of several of them how- 
eTer have been strewed with diffiruK 
ties. It had been the unfortunate fate 
of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal 
company,for instance, to have its talent- 
ed projector apd presiding officer, 
Charles Fenton Mercer, displaced, and 
the office bestowed a person having 
no attachment to the enterprise, upon 
a partizan of his own, from a remote 
section of the union, altonether un- 
acquainted with the duties required of 
such an officer, and indifferent, it is 
feared, to any thing but the perquisites 
of the office. Again and ajijain it was 
the fortune of the same company to 
have their credit impaired by imputa- 
tions upon the proceedings of those en- 
trusted with the management of the 
company, and by long and labored in- 
vestigations into their prrceedings.— 
And finally, it was their hard destiny 
to have politics mixed up more or less 
with their administration, and obstruct- 
ing their onward direction. 

The principal embarrassments which 
occurred however were common to the 
whole of their projects, and originated 
in tlie difficulties which were uneX'« 



228 

rectedly found in obtaining funds upon 
the credit of the state on the terms 
which the law prescribed. At the 
naoment the law passed, or at any time 
before, there would have been no 
difficulty in obtaining funds at those 
rate?, but the untoward circumstances 
to which the monetary concerns of 
both Europe and America were sudden- 
ly reduced in that year, — the failure of 
the banks to continue specie payments; 
the depreciation of American securities 
and of the value of all stockb-^the gen- 
ral impairing of credit, all operated to 
increase the difficulty of obtaining 
funds. It was at length found indis- 
pensable to resort to direct taxation in 
order to insure the fajth of the state 
and to sustain its credit. 

When the legislature of Maryland 
first harmonized her conflicting parties 
local and political, in behalf of inter- 
nal improvements, which happened in 
the session of 1821-2, — and before any 
works were commenced, they very pru- 
dently determined to prepare fo^: the 
enterprise by levying taxes to sustain 
the treasury during the progress of 
their undertaking. The product of 
thQse taxes amounted to about $1003- 



224 

WIO per annum. 

This precaution however was aban- 
doned two or three years afterwards, 
ynder the pursuasion that it would be 
practicable to effect the improvements 
without the necessity of resorting to a 
tax upon the people Had the state 
confined its operations to a single en- 
terprise^and completed one before en- 
tering up n another project, there is no 
doubt that ail the projects couU have 
been accomplished one after anolher,and 
fctfar^less expense than they will even- 
tually cost. But such were the inveter- 
ate difficulties, which surrounded the 
projects, that though all admitted that 
this would he the course of prudence, it 
was utterly in vain to attempt to con- 
trol the case. The old local interests 
remained inflexible. Potomac should 
not have her canal, unless Baltimore 
had her rail road, and Susquehanna her 
tide water canal and rail road also — 
and soon. All must go on at once, or 
none should go. And onward they all 
went, still full of hope and buoyant 
with expectations. 

But the trying time was to come. In 
almost every such undertaking there is 
much aidor in the commencement, 



225 

which becomes exhausted whilst en* 
couutering those difficulties that are in- 
seperable from great works. Mistakes, 
mismanagrement, disappointment as to 
locality, thousands of objections start 
up, and even the patient and pprsever- 
ing friends of the enterprize are worn 
out ^^ith embarrassments which sur- 
round their progress. And the crisis 
at last arrives when it is discovered 
that the mginal estimates of cost will 
be considerably exceeded — their funds 
already exhausted — their credit at a 
large discount, and the public impa- 
tient at the delays which they have 
been unable to avoid. The interest, in 
the meantime, upon the amount al- 
ready expended, accumulates heavily, 
and has to be provided for, as well as 
the means wherewith to progress in 
the remaining work. Delay is render- 
ed exceedingly expensive — and to get 
on becomes every hour more and more 
difficult. 

One more manly effiDrt would proba- 
bly complete the enterprize. That ef- 
fort required that the legislature shouhl 
sustain the credit of the state for the 
occasion by an efficient direct tax* The 
people of Maryland hardly hesitated. 



S£6 

A large majority in «:af'h branch o! the 
legislature acqtiusceii srj the necessity; 
a new assc^sra-Mit (»l it.e whole of the 
property within tne stue was ilirtcted 
to be made, and a fix, considered ad- 
equate to the exigency has been lev- 
ied upon the pe p'c. In th.e 3'ear 1841 
the Tax Bill vvt,s pas cd, thouoh it was 
severaJ ycirs hefore it was got into ef» 
ficient operatjoii. 

The lollovvirig statement will give a 
general idea <d the e.itent and the cost 
of thelnlernai Improveirent Sy«tem in 
Maryland: 

Cost OF the Internal Improvb- 
MENTS OF Maryland. 

The Chesapeake and Ohio Canal is 
184 miles lon^:, (0»t the sum of $12, 
370,470 and has even in its present 
unfinished state an average income of 
some 00 or $(>0,000. 

The Tide Water Cawo/ is 45 miles 
lon^, an<l cost $^;3>900 000. 

The Port Ihpostt Canal is 10 mile? 
long, and co-t $-200,000. 

The BaVimore and Ohio Rail Rail 
Road is 168 miles long and cost some 
or $7,000,000. Its income in 1844 
was $658,620 and its nett profit $346^<t 



227 

The Baltimore and Washington Rail 
Road is 38 Miles long, and cost 3,000, 
000 and its income in 1841 was $212, 
129 of which $10},5'29 was nett. 
The Baltimore and Susquehanna Rail 
Road is 58 miies long and cost $7»623, 
600. 

The j3nnflpo/«5 and Elk Ridge Rail 
Road is '20 1-2 miles in length and cos| 
9414.435,60. 



CHAPTER IV. 
THE JUDICIARY OF MARYLAND. 

As much attention has been turned ot 
late to the subject of the Judiciary of 
Maryland, we give the following state- 
ment, which we copy from the Md. 
Rep., of the relative cost of the Ju» 
diciary of Maryland, and of other 
states, by which the reader will be able 
to judge of tlie relative merits of this 
system in our state and in other states. 

At the session of the Legislature of 
Maryland in 1844-5, the clerk of the 
House of Delegates was ordered to cor- 
respond with other States for the pur- 
pose of obtaining information as to the 
enable the Legislature to determine 
Judiciary expenses of those States, so 
as to whether the Judiciary system of 
Md. was so ranch more^ expensive than 
that of other states as to require reform. 

Answers were received from the 
States of New York, Pennsylvania, 
Virginia and Ohio, tvhich will be found 
i^mong the public documents of the last 



229 

Session of the Legislature, marked J: 

And from these we learn the follow^ 
iog facts in regard to the comparative 
expense of the Judiciary of Maryland 
and of those states. 

The cost of the Judiciary of Mary- 
land according to a statement prepared 
at the Treasury, is 36,770. 

This includes every dollar paid out 
of the Treasury or otherwise, on that 
account, our system authorising no in- 
direct or incidental payment to tiie 
Judges of any description whatever. 
They receive certain Bxed salaries 
except the Judges of Baltimore Coun- 
ty Court, who, in consideration of the 
court, are allowed a certain proportion 
enormous amount of business in that 
of the tax on Judicial proceeding 

In New York the amount paid on 
account ot the Judiciary fncludino- the 
court of Erro-s, is $53,930. 

These sums are paid out of the 
Treasury, but independently of them, 
the Chancellor, the Vice Chancellors! 
the assistant Chancellor, and the Judges 
of the Circuit, and of (he SupreTne 
Court, are allowed Chamber fees, the 
amount of which we have no means of 
precisely ascertaining, but they are ivk 



Ji30 

80!ne instances, understood to be coa^ 
siderable. 

But this is not all. In each, of the 
6fty nine counties of the State, there 
are five Judges of tiie county courts 
who each receive $2 per day for every 
day these courts are in session. In ad» 
dition to which, tl^erfe are in the city 
of New York six Judges, who are paid 
salaries by the city. 

It is not easy to say. how much the 
compensation paid to these county, and 
city Judges, increases the aggregate ex- 
pense, of ti:e Judiciary of New York; 
but looking to tlie size, and population 
of their counties, it must very Jargely 
augment it. 

The number of County Court Judges 
!s 295, (being five times 59,) and they 
each receive, as we have seen, a per di- 
em allowance of $2, beirg equal to 
$590 per day. 

Assuming that these Judges set two 
hundred days in the year, wiiich is not 
an extravagant assumption, when the 
territorial extent and papulation of 
their counties is considered, and the 
cost of this branch of their system 
alone, is $118,000 

Which added to the sum paid 



231 

the Chancellors, &c#, as at-/ 

ready stated ol 53,930 

-Makes, $171,930 

besides the Cli.unber fees, and thejsal- 
aries of the city Judges, of whom there 
are six. 

Now notwithstanding tliis statement, 
founded upon official and unquestiona- 
ble document}", the ndvocates for Ju- 
dicial reform, will still be heard, as 
they have long been heard, sajing that 
our system c >^ts more than is paid, in 
the Empire iState of New York. 

It appears by the same document, 
that the cost of the Judiciary system of 
Virginia.exclusiveof iMao:istrates courts 
is $74,350, in addition to \^hich, the 
Judges o! the Courts of Appeals, and 
of the General Court, (of whom there 
are 27,) receive a mileage allowance 
of 20 cents a mile, for every mile they 
travel, in goin^ to and returning from 
court. 

In Pennsylvania the Judiciary De- 
partment costs $99,744.50; and in Ohio 
independently of the sums paid to the 
Associate or Probate Judges, (the am- 
ount of which is not given,) the sala- 
ries paid to the Judges of the courts of 



282 

Common Pleas, and the Judges of the 
Supreme and Superiour courts, arc 
stated at $25,251 25. 

The same wiiter in commenting fur« 
ther on the cost of the Judiciary in 
Maryland, says: 

Our object however in adverting to 
this subject, is to show, that the greater 
portion of the amount which is paid 
from the treasury to the Maryland J«» 
diciary is in fact placed in the treasury 
by revenue derived fromjthe courts. — 
The amount which is paid out of the 
treasury to the Judges is $36,548 67, 
We find by an examination of the 
last report of the treasury that there 
was received during the last year — 
For taxes in Chancery 674 32 

For taxes on plaintiffs 5,772 25 

For fines, forfeitures and a- 

mercements 4,414 9ji 

The treasurer has received or 
should have received for 
the current year for the 
tax on the commissions of 
Judges, Clerk and Regis- 
ters 1,650 00 
The income tax on Clerks and 
Registers, at 2^ per cent 
00 the amount returned ^ 



233 

by them to the last Legis- 
lature as their incomes will 
be 1.114 22 

For the tax imposed by laws] 
of last session on Clerks 
and Registers 10,000,00 



Making a revenue directly 

derived from the judicial 

action of our courts of $23,826 71 

Without adding other sources of rer- 

enue which might be fairly credited as 

derived from the judiciary, we find the 

amount received from the treasury by 

the judges over the asiount placed in 

the treasury by their action !s$12,722,&6 



• CHAPTER V. ^ 

' EDUCATION. 
■ When it is considered that the Ed« 
ucationofthe people is tlie only safe 
basis upon which any republican gov- 
ernment can rest m security, it will at 
once occur to every mind, that it is not 
only expedient, but also essentially ne- 
cessary that the cultivation of the mind 
of the youth who are to become the fu- 
ture citizens of a country should be 
one of the principal objects of attention 
to every wise government. 

It may then be well enquired, what 
has|Maryland done and what is she 
now doing towards the education of her 
citizens? 

According to the census of 1840 the 
number of persons in Maryland, who 
could nor read nor write was 11,817. 

In 1825, a law was passed for the 
Introduction of Primary Schools under 
systematic rules and regulations into 
the State. This hw has been adopted 
in many of the counlies of the 8tate« 



23S 

^nd acted upon with success. 

Soon after its passage the law went* 
into operation in Anne Arundle county 

In 1838 it was first put into opera- 
tion in Frederick County. 

The means Jippropriated by the 
State of Maryland lor Education con- 
sists as follows: — 

1st. The "Academy Fund" — This 
is an appropriation of some $800 or 
ihereabout, which has been granted by 
the state for the benefit of an Acade- 
my in each County of the State, and 
which is a charge upon the Treasury at 
large, havinjj: been granted first to one 
county and then to another, as the oc- 
<-asion might call for it, untill finally 
each county seems to have a prescrip- 
tive right to this amount, for i*s high 
school. The amount thus paid annu< 
ally by the State is now about $19, 
600,00 as per the Treasurer's Report 
of 1844 5. 

This fund is appropriated as follows^ 
To St. John's College $3,000,00. 

^'Each county $800 16,000,00. 

^'Brookvijle Academy 200,00« 

^'Bev. John McElroy, Fred. 400,00. 

$19,600,00« 



236 

' Andtlie Institution to which the fund« 
Snay be given is bound to educate one 
poor scholar for each hundred dollars 
given to it. 

We may also here remark that, in 
addition to the funds thus bestowed 
by the State, the Legislature had 
frequently made grants of Lotteries, 
and other pecuniary advantages, such 
as freedom from Taxation &p., for the 
benefit of Literary Institutions. 

It granted atone time a Lottery of 
20,000 to St. John's College, and also 
a Lottery of $50,000 to the Frederiek 
Female Academy. 

St. John's College. We may also 
remark under this head that immedi- 
ately on the close of (he Revolutionary 
war, an endowment of St. Jol n*s Col- 
lege was made by a large appropria- 
tion annually thereto. During high 
party times this donation was wiih« 
drawn and the college illegally depriv- 
ed of it. But subsequently, on a calm 
representation of the facts, an appropri- 
ation of $3,000 annually was made ta 
the College, provided she would relin- 
quish all claims upon the State for the 
original grant and have the same record- 
ed in the court ot Appeals. Thi* 



2B7, 

was accordingly done. 

2. The "Free School FrND."T!ri« 
18 a distinct Fund trom the above, and 
was coinraenced somewhere about the 
year 1815, when the State, upon char- 
tering the banks, required of them to 
pay a bonus for their charters which 
was to be appropriated for the purpo- 
ses of education. 

At the same time that the banks paid 
this sum, the) were also further re- 
quired, as a part of their bonus to make 
a Turnpike Road from the Cont^co- 
cheague to Cumberland. 

As this Turnpike enured principal 
ly to the benefit of the western coun- 
ties of the State, it was agreed that the 
part paid by the banks to the school 
fund, should be annually and equally 
divided between the seveial countiei 
o( the state and the city of Baltimore. 
This fund has been managed by the 
State and invested by it in bank stock, 
as a ''Capital"for the benefit of the 
several counties. And from this Cap- 
ital, amounting in 1844 ♦o the sura of 
$159,108 48, the proceeds are paid 
over annually as required to the sev- 
eral counties for the benefit of their 
Free Schools. 



238 

Further; — when the State received 
from the General Government its share 
of the Surplus Fund it was arpropria- 
ted (1839 ch. 33.) to the benefit ol the 
Free Schools of the state. The State 
afterwards having occasion to borrow 
this money, the same amount was re- 
turned from the proceeds of the Bait, 
and Washington Rail Road on which 
it is now a charge. 

One Thousand Dollars of the interest 
of this surplus fund was appropriated for 
the education of the Indigent Blind of 
the State; and the remainder is distribu- 
ted,one half equally between the several 
counties and the City of Baltimore^ 
and the other halt between the same 
according to their respective popula« 
tion. 

From the interest of this fund there 
was paid in the year 1844 the sum of 
$34,069,36 to the benefit of the Free 
Schools of the State. 
i* Altogether in 1844 the Treasurer of 
the State received for the Free Scboolt 
Fund $63,808 65; and disbursed to the 
counties the sum ot $67,333 96.— 
(Treas, Report pp. l3.) 

This School Fund is paid over by the 
Treasurer to the School commisRODerij 



23& 

of those counties where (here are such 
officers, and in other counties to the 
commissioners of the Tax or Levy 
Court, and it is by them distributed as 
they judge best, either equally among 
the Schools, or unequally according to 
the population. 

The State also appropriates for the 
Education of its Deaf and Dumb the 
the sum ot $3000. 

The County Tax. — In addition to 
the amount received frrtm the State 
both "for its "Academies" and for its 
"Free Schools" many of the counties 
have the power to lay a furthet Tax, 
through their Levy Courts, so as to ep 
able them to carry out the system of 
Primary Education. 

In Frederick County the sum of 
$8000 is usually levied on the 
county at large for the benefit of the 
schools. And also, in this county, at 
the discretion of the Trustees, the sum 
of 25 cents per month is levied on each 
pupil, who is able to pay. 

The funds thus derived from the 
State, the County, and the moderate 
tax on the pupil, constitute the means 
of support ol the Primary School Sys* 
tetti of Maryland, 



24Q 

From this detail it will be »ee» 
that a liberal and beneficent pohcj 
is pursued by Maryland, hanapered 
as she is with debt, for the foster- 
ing of Education. For besides the aid 
that she has extended towards the Uni- 
Tersity of Maryland, at Baltimore, she 
has liberally endowed St. John's Col- 
lege at Annapolis, an Academy in each 
County of the State, and has also freely 
lent her hand of assistance towards the 
aid of the Free Schools of each county, 
thus providing for the education of all 
classes and grades of her citizens. 



CHAPTER VI, 



CENSUS OF MARYLAND FOR 1840, 
As published by the Marshal. 



Wh tes 



Free 
blacks 



Slaves, 



Total 
popula- 
tion 



Al'y. 


14,777 


216 


Wash. 


27,733 


1,556 


Fred. 


27,575 


2,987 


Carroll 


15,223 


895 


Bait. 


24,184 


3,4781 


Harf'd. 


12,065 


2,449 


Mont.* 


8,280 


1,240 


P.G. 


7,832 


1.080 


St. M. 


6.051 


1.413 


Cal. 


3.664 


1,292 


Char. 


5,988 


817 


A. A, 


14,597 


5,120 


Cecil, 


13.351 


2,552 


Kent^ 


5,618 


2,486 


Car. 


5,373 


1,727 


Talbot 


6,054 


2,336 


Q.A. 


6,1C8 


2,540 


Som, 


11.563 


2.645 


Dor, 


10,647 


3,965 


Wor. 


11.643 


3,063 


BCity 


81,317 


17,980 









Sill 
2,505' 
4,420, 
l,120; 
4,400 
l,5S7i 
5,127, 
10,640' 
5,757 1 
4.401 
9,280 
9.816' 
l>34Si 
2,7411 
776' 
3,698' 
9 979; 
5,3951 
4,232| 
3.543 
3,212, 



15,704 
28,792 
34,982 
17,238 
32,062 
17,051 
14,647 
19,552 
13,22? 

9.355 
16,093 
29,531 
17,249 
10,845 

7,876 
12.088 
12,628 
19,603 
18,844 
18,249 
102.509 



316,544 I 61,837 89.736 | 46S.127 



*iJy an aci oi CoHgresa,llie census oi lliia county «»« 
ordered to be loiaki n, OD account of not being coiu 

pl«te. 



242 

ThP as^grpgate Increase of ttie pnpufaUon oi 
the state within the last fitty ypitrs has beei) 
148,399 or an average of very nearly 3.000 per 
year. 

The cify of Baltimore alone, has increased 
in population within the la^t fifty years from 
13,503 to 102.509, say 89,006, leaving- 59,393 
increase tor the residue of the state. 

The population of the Eastern and Western 
Shores from 1790 to 1840, inclusive, are as 
foilow?: 

Kastern Snore 1790, 107,638; 1800, 112,536 — 
1810, 117 121— 1820, 115,639—1830,119,582-. 
1S40, 117.382. 

Westprn Shore — 1790, 2rl2. 089; 1800. 237,- 
1.56; 1810,^63,435— 1820, 291,711— 1830, 327.- 
464: 1840, 350,745. 

It wiil t)e perct'iveil that 'he population of 
the Eastern Shore within the last filty years 
has only increased 9,744, or n ne ppr cent. — 
and that within tl.e last ten years the popula- 
tion of t!'at shore has diminished 2,200, or 
abotit two pel cent. 

The population of the Western Shore, has in 
the last fifty years, increased 148,654 — and in 
the ia?t ten years 23,281. 

Jlsgregatea of ivhites, free colored, and ilavei 
under each census from 1790 to 1840. 

In 1790, whites, 208,649. free colored, 8,043 
sUves, 103.036— total 219,728. 

In 1800, whites, 216,356, free colored, 19,- 
587, slaves, 105,635— total 341,578. Increase 
j[i ten years, 21,850. 

In 1810, whit'^p, 235,117, fee colored, 
83,927, slaves. 111.532— total 380,648 In^ 
crease in ten yeais, 38,968. 

In 1820, whites, 255,622— free colored 
4^.730, slaves, 106.998- total 407,3f0. iDcrea^p 



243 

m fen years, 26,804. 

In 'l830, whites, 291,108— free colorpd 
52.938, slaves, 102,994 Total 447,040. In- 
crease in ten years 39,690. 

in 1840, whites, 316,544— free colored, 
64,837, slaves, 89.736— total 468,117. Increase 
an ten years, 21,077. 

The proportion of whites to the colored 
population in the year 1755, was 23 whites, tp 
one colored, in 1790 it was 1,88, in 1800. 1.75 
to one; in 1810, I 62, in 1820, 1.77— in 1830, 
1.88— in 1840, it was 2.088-100 whites to one 
colored per.<=on. 

The condition of the colored popular 
lioo, has however, during this period 
undergone a very material change. 
Sixty years asjo, nearly all the descent 
(fants of Africa within the state were 
slaves. In 1790, not quite one out of 
every fourteen were dee. In thirty 
years from that period, (1820.) the 
number of free had increased to 44,730, 
and bore the proportion of considerably 
more than one-fourth of the total numbf?r 
of their race in the state. During the 
SitKie period, the entire increase of the 
slaves, was but 3;968, being le«s than 
four per cent. In 18*30. more than 
ooe-third of the colored people of the 
state were free, and in 1840, the pro* 
portion ol free colored to the slaves 
was as 61 to 89 — approximating one- 



CHAPTER VII. 
COLORED POPULATION— CoLo- 

NrZATION. 

The original project of the founders 
of the Maryland Colonization Society 
was, by a gradual yet certain procegs, 
to reliere the state entirely of its whole 
colored population, both free and slave, 
with their own consent. And this was 
to be effected, first by removing the 
free blacks, offering them a free passage 
at the expense of the Society, and then 
by gradually promoting the liberation 
of the slaves, and removing ihem. 

Up to the time of a change ^vhich 
was recently made in the laws of Mary- 
land, in no State of the Union had e- 
mancipation so rapidly progressed, and 
in fut, in no state ot the Union, at 
present, is there su large a number of 
tree colored people as in Maryland. 

But since the year 1831, the legal 
policy of the State has been to check 
emancipation as much as possible by 



245 

prohibiting the freeing of slaves, unies4 
on the f'ondition of their leaving the 
State, and also to lessen the free color- 
ed population by prohibiting immigra- 
tion 'nto the State. 

According to the last census, in 
(1840,) the number of whites in our 
state were 316,544; free colored 64^837 
slaves 89.736,- Total 468 117. 
" The proportion of free colored popu- 
lation in our s(a<e has been continually 
on the increase. Thus, in 1790 it vas 
8,043; in 1800,19,587; in 1810, 33,927^ 
in 1820; 44.730, in 1830, 52.938;~m 
1840, 64,837. 

Whereas, the slave population arri- 
ved at its maximum in 1810, after 
which it began to declirie. Thus; in 
1790 it was 103, 036; in J800, 105,635; 
in 1810^ 111,532; in 1820, 106.998; in 
3830, 102,994: in 1840 it was 69,736. 

In 1830 more than one third of the 
colored population of the state wer« 
free; and in 1840 the proportion of frf e 
colored to tlie slaves wa.s as 61 to 89 — 
approximaliiig one half. The J^laves 
in the state have diminishtd withsn the 
last ten years 12,158 or over 12 per. ct, 

The proportion of whites to the col- 
ored populatioa through successive 



246 

Tpars has stood as follovvs;- — In the year 
3755 there was 2.3 white to one coior= 
ed: in 1790 it was 1 68; in 1800 it was 
1.75; ill 1810, IM; in 1820. 1.77; in 
1830. 1,S8; in 1840, it was 2.088.100 
whites to one c&loied person, more 
than double; so tiiat it will be seen that 
the pioportion ot whites to the black is 
juther increasing. 

Now as to the increase of the frte 
blacks in the state it has been, during 
the last ten years 8,899 and in the last 
thirty years 27,910 — being an average 
of over 900 per year(while the decrease 
of the slaves has been over 12 per ct. 
per year.) 

But the entire colored population o.?" 
tile State has diminished from 
1830 to 1840, 3,359— being over two 
per cent. And during the same time, 
the white population has increased 
eit>ht and three q'jarter per cent. 

It will be thus observed that w*bi!e 
the white population iscon>iderably in- 
treasing, and tlie free colored popula- 
tion also incieasing at the average rate 
of about 900 per year, that the slave 
population is greatly drained oft" by the 
higher price that they command in the 
SDutkern markets, and by their reiKOY- 



21f 

fei from tlie State without tl e privilege 
of a return. 

The tendency ih en of affairs in Mary- 
laud has beeu lowards au increase of 
the free colored population and a de- 
crease of the slave population, and a de- 
crease diUo of the entire colored popu- 
lation. 

A very important question here arises 
as to what is the true policy of Marv^ 
land ? 

Is it to check this tendency to a con- 
version of the entire colortd population 
of the slate into a free population; or 
is it to promote the increase oi tiie fret 
population at the expense of ihe slave 
population ? 

Is it desirable thai thire should be a 
mixed population of free and slave in 
the state? or ralher, to have it all frte f 
or to have all slaves, as tiie operation 
of the law, (except so far as it is coun- 
teracted by the natural increase of the 
free colored populaiion) now tends to 
make it? If it be not desirable to ha\e 
a population mixed of free and slave, 
(and all seem to complain of its cor- 
rupting influence) then, which would 
te the most beneficial to Maryland, to 
have an entire free colcrtd populetion, 



Us 

or Jin entire slave colored population? 

We say that this is an important 
question to be decided, for this reason, 
because, if Colonization is the policy 
of the state, of course the I la-clcs must 
be freed or else be bought out before it, 
(the colonization scheme,) can entirely 
relieve the state «>f its colored popula- 
tion. And the policy of the hw there- 
fore, should be, to encourage freedom 
rather than slavery. 

Indeed the sacrifices always made by 
Maryland for the promotion of Coloni- 
zation ,«^ the steadfastness with which 
through a series of years, she has adher- 
ed to that policy, shows how dear is to 
her the great object wliich she expects 
to eventually accomplish by it, and th« 
certain though gradual change which she 
contemplates being able to eflfect in the 
character of her population in finally 
rendering it of an entirely homogene- 
ous character. 

The fact that Colonizution is looked 
Upon in Maryland as the great antidf^te 
Jo the mad schemes of the abolitionists 
is what endears it still more to the peo - 
pie of our State. 

Yet notwithstanding the tax annually 
paid by ihe plople to carry out the Col - 



249 

^uization scheme, ema»cipatiop> is not 
now the policy;— the law of 1831, 
(which is much dis^egMded) prohibiting 
the liberation of slaves within the bor- 
ders of the State, except upon certain 
extraordinary conditions It was about 
the year 1831 that the State adopted 
the policy of prohibiting manumission, 
except in extraordinary cases, or 6a 
condition of the perbon^ who should be 
so manumitted, leaving the stale; and al- 
so of prohibiting entirely the introduc- 
tion of colored persons, free or slaves, 
into the state. 

Tlie whole increase of the free color- 
ed population therefore, arises, from ibis 
natural inci ease alone and not by immi» 
gration; and the drain /rom the state, of 
the slave population, is fiister, by sale 
and other causes, as a slave population, 
than it would be, by colonization, it 
tve&. 

The State seems therefore to have a- 
dopted the policy of encouraging the 
existence of a sufficient number of the 
free colored population to colonize from; 
at the same tinie that, keeping steadily 
in view the ultimate object of at la^t 
entirely disburdening the State of this 
kind ol population, it allows the more 



25G 

rPipid process of extirjction to g;o off; 
by the quiet removal of the slaves iiom 
the State bj the fetrong and ovej r'ulmg 
motives of self iiUferest. 

The steady, settled, definite object 
then of those patriotic sons of Ma^-yiand 
10 whom we owe the "beneficenl scbecic 
of Maryland Colonization, has bee; , 
to enroll Maryland, if gradually, yet 
i-i-iVd\ii]y, with those States North of 
Mason's and Dixon's line. And, the 
fact if Maryland's being a border Slate,. 
\\here the black hue first faintly min- 
gles with and fades into the white, and 
the further (act of the sieady legisla^ 
tion of Maryland tending towards this 
end, and that tlie scheme of Coloniza. 
tiom also furthers and promotes this ob- 
iect, gives encoutagement to the hope 
Vhat wiiat has been consideied one (.-f 
the greatest obstacles to the advanct- 
mem of our State in prosperity will at 
length be removed, aiid that she wili 
then take side, in increase of popula- 
tion and of wealth, with the most fi.- 
1 ored of her sister confederates. 

If then the existence of a riiixed po] - 
Lijaiion of free ai;d slave must, frou) the 
policy of Maryland, siili be tolerated, 
uetvrilhsuudstjg the corruplir.g iv.^u- 



251 

«nce that^thtiy exercise upon each othef, 
it might well become a question worthT 
«f the consideration of fetatesmen and 
piiilanthropists, whether something 
more could not now be done to im- 
prove and ameliorate the condition of 
the free blacks of the State, by prepar- 
ing them for the contemplated changej 
by substituting, even in this countrjj 
habits of industry tor those of idieuess, 
of regularity for disorder, of neatness 
and exertion for fifth and indolence, of 
steady labor and sobriety for loafering 
and drunkenness, and by encourging a 
cultivation of the moral faculties and 
the formation ot a character to be 
depended upoji and trusted to, in 
place of the petty, pilfering, triding, 
indolent and lazy habits which so ex- 
tensively prevail among them to the 
destruction of their comfort, ^. their 
jQealth, their lives, and to the loss of 
much 'vealth and labor to the public. 

COLONIZATION. 

In 1831 (ch 281) the Legislature of 
Maryland appropriated the sum oi 
$10,000 per year for the promotion of 
colonization, and appointed a Board 

tof Managers to carry out their bcBefi- 
ceat views. lo addition to thisj privai^ 



252 

collections have also been taken up and 
have generally varied from 2 to $10,000 
per year 

This Board, in 183^, first sent 150 
emigrants from the Eastern Shore, to 
the Colony of Monrovia, in Africa. — 
In 1834 it was determined to form the 
new settlement of Maryland in Liberia, 
at Cape Palmas. In 1837 this Colony 
consisted of more than 300 persons, 
and was in a flourishing condition. — 
Up to the year 1841, the sura expend- 
ed by the Society in founding the Col- 
onv, had been about 127 thousand dol- 
lars, of which sum 76 thousand had 
been paid by the State Colonization 
fund, and 32 thousand by private indi- 
viduals. From 1831 to 1839 the So- 
ciety had sent out 14 expeditions con- 
taining 634 emigrants, being about two 
thirds of the annual increase of one 
year. 

The effort of the Society has b^en to 
establish a regular Packet and to induce 
the colored people oi the State by a 
sense of their own interest, and a de- 
monstration of the advantai^e of a change, 
to make the emigration by which they 
would be so much benefitted 

The question then as to whether, hr 



258 

tliis slow process/this whole'popuiation 
can be removed is an interesting one 
which is now being resolved, but which 
we have not time now to consider, or 
comment upon,as this article has already 
spread out to a much greater length, 
uader oar hands, than was inteD<i€do 



CHAPTER Vin, 



TRADES A.ND EMPLOYMENTS. 

We abridge from the Census of 1844 
ihe following statement of the numbers 
of persons occupied in the different 
trades and employments in Maryland. 

Persons 

There are in the State, engaged in Mining 287 

in Agriculture 68,080 

lin Commerce 3,172 

in Manufactures and Trades 21,998 

in Navigation of the Ocean 718 

Navigation of CanalsXaUes and Rivers 1.500 

Learned Professions and Engineers 1,6C8 

There are in the State, 11 Universities 6r 

Colleges, with 813 Students. 

122 Academies and Grammar Sthoois, with 

4,153, Scholars, 
562, Piimary and Common Schoclo, with 

16,321, Scholars. 
6,621 Scholars at Public charge. 
11,580 IVliile persons over 20 yean of age^ 
who cannot read and torUe, 



CU\?VER IX. 



t:iz \ssess.\isnt of the statk. 

Previous to the asses'^ment law of 
IStI, the la^t report to the Treasurer 
of the Statf? exhibits the value of the 
Dfoperty in the different counties of the 
Srate at $i0;V391,732,-23; bat as the 
mode of valuation was principaJIy d\- 
footed under the art of 1785 and 1797, 
♦ be p'*opor'ion of the property in one 
part of the state to that in another, or 
in fjict, the real value of the property irj 
any part of the State was not at all as- 
certained by this HiiojiC of ass^essment. 

By the valnation however, under 
the Tax law of 1841 accordin<^ to which 
the taxes have b^^en since levied a near- 
er approach to the value of the proper- 
ty in the different counties of the State 
may be obtained, and we thereloce an- 
nex it below. U shows the whole 
va'ue of the p;operty in Maryland to 
be somewhat short of two hundred mil- 
lions of dollars : — 



S5tS 

Allegany county, - - $4,008,58b 

Anne A. county, - - 6.915,014 

Baltimore city, - - 66,426,711 

Baltimore county, - - 13,666,232 

Calveri county, - - 2,945,400 

Caroline county, - • 1,407,628 

Carrol! county, - . 6,911250 

Cecil county, - - - 5,055,720 
Charles county, - • 5,472,920 

Dorchester county, - 4,265,745 

Frederick county^ . * 19,081,667 

Harford county, - * 4,a39,901 

Kent county, - - . 3,672,391 

Montgomeiy county - 5,102.070 

P. George's county - 9,875,047 

Queen Ann's county, * 4,315,327 

St Warv'S county/ . 4,359,048 

Somerset county, - 3,315,327 

Talbot county, . . 4,759,147 

Washington county, ^ 12,723,954 

Worcester county, - 3,584,07! 

But this statement of the wealth of 

tiie state probably falls considfrably 
below its real value, 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 





014 313 729 6 • 



